Perhaps those advocating war with Pakistan could explain to me how that is likely to reduce the number of Indians killed by Pakistanis?
Because, frankly, I just don't see it. We've seen how well Afghani fighters have been suppressed by taking out the government - I note another two British soldiers were killed on Thursday.
What benefit would India get from going to war with Pakistan?
The poster used the article as a base for advocating war with Pakistan. I pointed out that the article does not support his position that the Pakistani government was involved in this. That is mere supposition on the part of both of you. Yes, the Pakistani government could be involved, but so could it also be the work of non-government agents. Or rogue agents on either side.
I also pointed out that another war is stupid. I hope you agree with at least that.
Were I the Indian government (or from India, either at 9 or 90), I'd be far more concerned over the performance of the police, military and other organs of the state in Mumbai responding to the terrorist attacks.
From an FT perspective, what was going on recalled some of the criticism here of "Indian Call Centers". Certainly, there were too many "officials" and too much "officiousness" on display. Then there was the unconfirmed rumor that all/some of the "Bullet proof vests" worn by the anti-terror paramilitaries turned out to not be bullet proof at all. Certainly, if India is to rise above third world status, especially in one of its major cities, even with financial constraints, the display of fire equipment and available water in the last gasps of the attacks was an utter travesty. When it came to time required and ability to deploy and employ prepared military/paramilitary/police response, heads will likely fall after what was apparently - at least on TV and in other reports - a great deal of milling about not very smartly (and ineffectively).
No matter where they trained or embarked upon there sea voyage (if all came ashore from a boat/skiff/launch directly or from a "Mother Ship") the terrorists certainly displayed careful planning and decent intelligence. While a lot of years have passed since I was called upon to learn about such things, it's highly unlikely that they were "tribesman from some remote border zone". These were likely, at least most of them, urbanites, likely resident in Mumbai for some period, familiar with the infrastructure, and aware of likely response, both in time frame and extent.
These were events from which even the "villainous" Pakistanis had nothing to gain, although there are certainly groups within Pakistan capable of and willing to provide support/logistics/training/weaponry for such an operation, but I suspect that many if not most of the operatives themselves were "local boys" or at least former residents of the city.
For Indians living abroad, certainly to grieve for the dead and react at the horror of events is justified, but to adopt what seems so often a sort of xenophobic retreat into defense of the actions of the local and national governments (An "India against the World" posture) is totally inappropriate.
Now is the time to be critical of "the system" as it exists and seems dramatically "under capable" when faced by events such as occurred in Mumbai (or from a naval perspective shooting from the hip when it comes to confusing an apparently innocent fishing boat with a pirate ship).
Were I the Indian government (or from India, either at 9 or 90), I'd be far more concerned over the performance of the police, military and other organs of the state in Mumbai responding to the terrorist attacks.
Didn't come across as very effective or competent did they? The terrorists on the other other hand...... They were creative and effective. One has to wonder what good they could spread in the world around them if they were to solve the problems in their lives and for those around them with the creativity with which they cause death and destroy the lives of others. Alas, blaming and then attacking others is always the easier option.....
What is your source for the belief that the e-mail was in Hindi? I have not been able to read much about the incident as I am travelling (26th-30th) and am in Prague.
What I did find was that the e-mail was signed Guru al-Hindi. Among Arabic speakers Hindi means Indian (possibly Hindu, which also orginally meant Indian). Hindu came to be associated with religion distinct from Islam only after Islam made incursions into India. Even in the 1th and 18th centuries, Europeans used Hindu or Hindoo to refer to people of India.
P.S. Hindu militants are stupid for falling in line with thinking of extremist Muslims.
As soon as this happened i have been overloaded with news and I have more or less "viewed" them all ( "view" because I have not had a chance to really scrutinize or analyze the whole scenario even though I have been aware of the usual suspects )
IIRC I believe that the Guardian did mention about the e-mail also in one of its articles on Thursday and one of the Indian newspapers. If not the Guardian , the IHT.
I have visitors spending their TGiving with me and hopefully by tomorrow evening I would be able to pinpoint the source to you.If you can be patient
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA (Recently of San Francisco)
Programs: UA-1P,SPG-Gold,Marriott-Silver
Posts: 10,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yaatri
Only one person has advocated eradication of Muslims and he has been rightly taken to task. It is mighty unfair of you to characterise this thread as "ethnic cleansing".
It is sad, that so many people died, including a number of jews. IS there any reason you choose to remember only Jews? Yet you feel superior by denigrating, rightly though, who thinks so parochially! It is ironic isn't it?
You use a terminology that I, and I am sure there are others who, don;t understand it. Can you please explain what it is we are supposed to do to remember the people who died and are close to your heart? And are we alowed to do the same for the non-jews? We won't want to belittle the death of the people who are special in your heart.
What swei0009 posted was a quote from an ultra-orthodox Jewish organization called Chabad -- it's the organization that sponsored the Jewish center in Mumbai at which the rabbi, his wife and three other people were killed. These are not her words, but Chabad's. Chabad, in its statement, is speaking to Jews and non-Jews do not need to concern themselves with mitzvahs (blessings) or lighting Shabbos candles (the traditional way Jews welcome the sabbath). That you remember them, along with the other victims, is enough. Perhaps considering the first sentence, "we must do what Gabi and Rivka would want us to do, redouble our efforts of bringing light and goodness to a world filled with evil and negativity," is worthwhile as well as it is something that all people should strive for.
I can't speak for swei0009 or her motivation for posting, but two things that struck me in this thread was (1) the attempt to distinguish the Mumbai massacres from Muslim extremist terrorism (which, from what I've been hearing on the BBC was a misplaced effort), and (2) one poster who, in his effort to explain these despicable acts as something other than religiously-motivated said, "it's not always about the Jews," when it was pointed out that a Jewish center was specifically targeted (along with hospitals, the two hotels, a restaurant and the train station).
As I've said since the beginning of this thread, Muslim extremism isn't Islam anymore than Jewish extremism is Judaism or Christian extremism is Christianity. With respect to Mumbai, everything I'm hearing on the BBC (CNN's world service is worthless) is that the murderers were trained by at least one Muslim extremist group. That they may have come from Pakistan is meaningless -- nothing points to Pakistan's involvement in this disaster.
There is, however, one glimmer of hope that I see in all this. India has made a point of making it clear that it does not hold Pakistan responsible, and the Pakistani president has unambiguously condemned the attacks and promised cooperation. At least to me, this is a major step forward to world peace -- a dozen years ago, I would have expected a shooting war between the two countries. It seems that, finally, world leaders all over (including Barack Obama) are agreeing that extremist terrorism is a global problem and we must all work together to end it. Though I'm just one person, I embrace both Pakistan's and India's willingness to work together, and their mutual recognition that this isn't a geopolitical battle, an ethnic battle or a religious battle. It's a battle against some very well organized criminals who, like some of virtually every faith, have perverted their religious beliefs into something sick, virulent and destructive and represent a threat to civilized human beings, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Christian and everyone else.
It is ludicrous to blame all Muslims for these horrendous acts, just as it is ludicrous to blame all Christians for Oklahoma City or all Jews for the acts of extremist settlers in the occupied territories. If India and Pakistan can get it right at this most tragic of moments, I would hope that we on OMNI can as well.
Programs: AA EXP 1MM, UA 1K MM, Hilton Diamond, Costco General Member
Posts: 19,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTravel
What swei0009 posted was a quote from an ultra-orthodox Jewish organization called Chabad -- it's the organization that sponsored the Jewish center in Mumbai at which the rabbi, his wife and three other people were killed. These are not her words, but Chabad's. Chabad, in its statement, is speaking to Jews and non-Jews do not need to concern themselves with mitzvahs (blessings) or lighting Shabbos candles (the traditional way Jews welcome the sabbath). That you remember them, along with the other victims, is enough. Perhaps considering the first sentence, "we must do what Gabi and Rivka would want us to do, redouble our efforts of bringing light and goodness to a world filled with evil and negativity," is worthwhile as well as it is something that all people should strive for.
I can't speak for swei0009 or her motivation for posting, but two things that struck me in this thread was (1) the attempt to distinguish the Mumbai massacres from Muslim extremist terrorism (which, from what I've been hearing on the BBC was a misplaced effort), and (2) one poster who, in his effort to explain these despicable acts as something other than religiously-motivated said, "it's not always about the Jews," when it was pointed out that a Jewish center was specifically targeted (along with hospitals, the two hotels, a restaurant and the train station).
As I've said since the beginning of this thread, Muslim extremism isn't Islam anymore than Jewish extremism is Judaism or Christian extremism is Christianity. With respect to Mumbai, everything I'm hearing on the BBC (CNN's world service is worthless) is that the murderers were trained by at least one Muslim extremist group. That they may have come from Pakistan is meaningless -- nothing points to Pakistan's involvement in this disaster.
There is, however, one glimmer of hope that I see in all this. India has made a point of making it clear that it does not hold Pakistan responsible, and the Pakistani president has unambiguously condemned the attacks and promised cooperation. At least to me, this is a major step forward to world peace -- a dozen years ago, I would have expected a shooting war between the two countries. It seems that, finally, world leaders all over (including Barack Obama) are agreeing that extremist terrorism is a global problem and we must all work together to end it. Though I'm just one person, I embrace both Pakistan's and India's willingness to work together, and their mutual recognition that this isn't a geopolitical battle, an ethnic battle or a religious battle. It's a battle against some very well organized criminals who, like some of virtually every faith, have perverted their religious beliefs into something sick, virulent and destructive and represent a threat to civilized human beings, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Christian and everyone else.
It is ludicrous to blame all Muslims for these horrendous acts, just as it is ludicrous to blame all Christians for Oklahoma City or all Jews for the acts of extremist settlers in the occupied territories. If India and Pakistan can get it right at this most tragic of moments, I would hope that we on OMNI can as well.
Very good post and I agree completely except that I am more pessimistic about the outcome. I think that the attacks will be very effective at damaging India economically and that it will lead to an escalation of tension between India and Pakistan. Those things being of course the goals of the attack. I hope your view of the future is more clear than mine, but I doubt it.
__________________
"And the only sound that's left after the ambulances go
Is Cinderella sweeping up on Desolation Row"
Programs: AF Gold, BA EC Blue, LH FTL, HH Gold, A|Club Silver
Posts: 4,367
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTravel
There is, however, one glimmer of hope that I see in all this. India has made a point of making it clear that it does not hold Pakistan responsible, and the Pakistani president has unambiguously condemned the attacks and promised cooperation. At least to me, this is a major step forward to world peace -- a dozen years ago, I would have expected a shooting war between the two countries. It seems that, finally, world leaders all over (including Barack Obama) are agreeing that extremist terrorism is a global problem and we must all work together to end it. Though I'm just one person, I embrace both Pakistan's and India's willingness to work together, and their mutual recognition that this isn't a geopolitical battle, an ethnic battle or a religious battle. It's a battle against some very well organized criminals who, like some of virtually every faith, have perverted their religious beliefs into something sick, virulent and destructive and represent a threat to civilized human beings, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Christian and everyone else.
It is ludicrous to blame all Muslims for these horrendous acts, just as it is ludicrous to blame all Christians for Oklahoma City or all Jews for the acts of extremist settlers in the occupied territories. If India and Pakistan can get it right at this most tragic of moments, I would hope that we on OMNI can as well.
Now we just need to get the terrorists on board, and we'll be all set.
While I would hope that India and Pakistan work together, my guess is that this is mostly non-state actors who don't take orders from Islamabad or New Delhi. So how to shut up the hate preaching imams?
A serious question for 2008 going into 2009...What is keeping the Muslim population in India from being on an equal playing field with the Hindu majority? Are the Hindus discriminating against them in large numbers? Are the Muslims not getting a similar level of education? Where is the social breakdown where kids feel they have to turn to radical ideology to get themselves heard?
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA (Recently of San Francisco)
Programs: UA-1P,SPG-Gold,Marriott-Silver
Posts: 10,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by etch5895
Now we just need to get the terrorists on board, and we'll be all set.
Though I can't think of a more revolting sentiment than that of the poster who espoused exterminating all Muslims, I'm absolutely fine with exterminating terrorists like the vermin they are. I hope Pakistan and India (and every other civilized nation in the world) join forces to eradicate terrorists of any ilk.
Quote:
While I would hope that India and Pakistan work together, my guess is that this is mostly non-state actors who don't take orders from Islamabad or New Delhi. So how to shut up the hate preaching imams?
I don't know enough about the structure and hierarchies of Islam to make a suggestion. I would note, however, that, at least under U.S. law, advocating violence with an imminent likelihood of it happening, is not privileged under the First Amendment.
Quote:
A serious question for 2008 going into 2009...What is keeping the Muslim population in India from being on an equal playing field with the Hindu majority? Are the Hindus discriminating against them in large numbers? Are the Muslims not getting a similar level of education? Where is the social breakdown where kids feel they have to turn to radical ideology to get themselves heard?
These are good and serious questions. Answering them, and addressing disparities, are good ways to constructively address the situation. I would note, however, that, at least from what I'm hearing on the BBC, the attackers were not Indian Muslims, many of whom appear to have been victims of the tragic slaughter along with Hindus, Jews and Christians.
Programs: AF Gold, BA EC Blue, LH FTL, HH Gold, A|Club Silver
Posts: 4,367
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTravel
Though I can't think of a more revolting sentiment than that of the poster who espoused exterminating all Muslims, I'm absolutely fine with exterminating terrorists like the vermin they are. I hope Pakistan and India (and every other civilized nation in the world) join forces to eradicate terrorists of any ilk.
Technicality: He said exterminate Islam, not Muslims. As if one could make someone simply forget a religious belief system. I am on board with the removal of the extremist religious belief systems (including extreme Islam and several reconstructionist sects of Chrisitianity, and basically any religious sect that wants to make their rules my rules).
But, how do you argue or debate with someone who does not fear death and who believes that by ridding the earth of 'infidels' is their path to heaven? For people like that, I think only Bart's solution applies. That solution, however, makes martyrs out of men who should be shunned as low life scum, and turns into a vicious cycle of violence and revenge. The goal is not so much to silence these men, but to convince everyone around them simply ignore them and their lunatic rants, until they are left with no followers and no income. Unfortunately, the organized religions have a one-up on that, because the unprovable promises of either eternal paradise or eternal damnation are too easy to sell to people who either can't or won't think for themselves. I don't know what the solutions are, other than to calmly point people in the direction of agnosticism. But then, considering how many people can have moderate religious beliefs and live peaceful lives, for them it is no problem. The Saudis have experimented with religious re-education to some degree of success, but then again, they have an almost unlimited supply of money. India (and certainly Pakistan) are not at that point.
The 'thug' comment is spot on, I think. These extremists bully people into compliance through fear and intimidation, and violence is the only thing rhat they will respect.
Location: Somewhere near DCA. NW Platinum. AA Platinum.
Posts: 11,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMOliver
Were I the Indian government (or from India, either at 9 or 90), I'd be far more concerned over the performance of the police, military and other organs of the state in Mumbai responding to the terrorist attacks.
From an FT perspective, what was going on recalled some of the criticism here of "Indian Call Centers". Certainly, there were too many "officials" and too much "officiousness" on display. Then there was the unconfirmed rumor that all/some of the "Bullet proof vests" worn by the anti-terror paramilitaries turned out to not be bullet proof at all. Certainly, if India is to rise above third world status, especially in one of its major cities, even with financial constraints, the display of fire equipment and available water in the last gasps of the attacks was an utter travesty. When it came to time required and ability to deploy and employ prepared military/paramilitary/police response, heads will likely fall after what was apparently - at least on TV and in other reports - a great deal of milling about not very smartly (and ineffectively).
No matter where they trained or embarked upon there sea voyage (if all came ashore from a boat/skiff/launch directly or from a "Mother Ship") the terrorists certainly displayed careful planning and decent intelligence. While a lot of years have passed since I was called upon to learn about such things, it's highly unlikely that they were "tribesman from some remote border zone". These were likely, at least most of them, urbanites, likely resident in Mumbai for some period, familiar with the infrastructure, and aware of likely response, both in time frame and extent.
These were events from which even the "villainous" Pakistanis had nothing to gain, although there are certainly groups within Pakistan capable of and willing to provide support/logistics/training/weaponry for such an operation, but I suspect that many if not most of the operatives themselves were "local boys" or at least former residents of the city.
For Indians living abroad, certainly to grieve for the dead and react at the horror of events is justified, but to adopt what seems so often a sort of xenophobic retreat into defense of the actions of the local and national governments (An "India against the World" posture) is totally inappropriate.
Now is the time to be critical of "the system" as it exists and seems dramatically "under capable" when faced by events such as occurred in Mumbai (or from a naval perspective shooting from the hip when it comes to confusing an apparently innocent fishing boat with a pirate ship).
I don't see anyone here praising the Indian authorities for their response in dealing with the crisis. As for the terrorists being more successful and efficient than the Indian police, that is usually the case. Can you, all honesty, claim that TSA is more efficient than the those who carried out 9/11. Honestly, I haven't seen enough of the news or TV coverage of the event to make a claim that the response by Indian authorities was an example of efficiency. Even if it were efficient, it could always be improved once you start utilising hindsight. So, let's not get off the topic here and create controversies where none exists.
Oh and where did you get this rant of yours "India versus the rest of the world"? What makes you think the perpetrators were not Pakistanis? I do not know if they were or not, but I would not be surprised if they were. Omar Sheikh Saeed, for example, lived in Delhi under numerous aliases for a while while stalking his victims, western (white) tourists. Kidnapping western tourists was his specialty. Americans were number on the priority list. It's very likely that Pakistani elements were involved. It's not difficult for a Pakistani to live in Indian cities once they have slipped in. If you do not drive, you will never have an opportunity to be asked to show your "papers". I have never been asked to prove my identity during my visits to India except having to show my passport upon entry and at the time of checking in for my flight. I have checked into hotels without every having prove who I was. Getting fake ID wouldn't be difficult either.
I too had seen reports that the claimed "pirate" ship might have been a Thai fishing trawler. But I also saw reports that the claim might have been made to file a false insurance claim. I do not know what the truth is. I have been travelling almost non stop since late October with brief stops at home in MD (two weeks in Malaysia and Singapore, followed by a about a week in Romania and Moldova, and now I am in Prague). Is it now confirmed that the Indian Navy actually sunk a fishing trawler rather than a pirate ship? THat proves how incompetent In dian Navy is. No military has ever made such a mistake, although I do recall bombing of Chinese Embassy, and Oh there was some country that invaded another country on false or faulty intelligence.
__________________
Those who sacrifice liberty of some to purchase a little temporary safety, will have neither liberty nor safety.
(or from a naval perspective shooting from the hip when it comes to confusing an apparently innocent fishing boat with a pirate ship).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yaatri
Is it now confirmed that the Indian Navy actually sunk a fishing trawler rather than a pirate ship? THat proves how incompetent In dian Navy is. No military has ever made such a mistake, although I do recall bombing of Chinese Embassy, and Oh there was some country that invaded another country on false or faulty intelligence.
The US Navy would never make such a mistake, would it?
It's dangerous to generalize based on isolated incidents.
Location: Somewhere near DCA. NW Platinum. AA Platinum.
Posts: 11,263
For the skeptics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMOliver
These were events from which even the "villainous" Pakistanis had nothing to gain, although there are certainly groups within Pakistan capable of and willing to provide support/logistics/training/weaponry for such an operation, but I suspect that many if not most of the operatives themselves were "local boys" or at least former residents of the city.
I am a bit tired of some self proclaimed experts on India Pakistan matters, who think they know, but the reality is that they do NOT.
FBI agents were preparing to fly to India. The State Department warned U.S. citizens still in the city that their lives remain at risk.
A U.S. counterterrorism official said some "signatures of the attack" were consistent with the work of Pakistani militant groups known as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed that have fought Indian troops in the disputed Himalayan region of Kashmir and also are reported to be linked to al-Qaida.
But the official emphasized it was premature to pinpoint who was responsible for the attacks. A second official, specializing in counterintelligence, also cautioned against rushing to judgment on the origins of the gunmen.
I have not claimed with certitude that Pakistan is definitely involved but that I wouldn't be suprised if Pakistan were involved.
__________________
Those who sacrifice liberty of some to purchase a little temporary safety, will have neither liberty nor safety.
I have not claimed with certitude that Pakistan is definitely involved but that I wouldn't be suprised if Pakistan were involved.
Exactly, since no one can ascertain for sure who is responsible and each and every one is pointing the finger at a particular group/country/govt.
Some people who know the region well are asking the following questions:
1. why were hostages taken by the attackers?
2. where was a decision made to make sure that the situation would not settle to a point where demands from hostage takers and negotiations may have entered into the picture?
3. why were the attackers interested in passports and the hotel guest registries.
4. Who usually go to or use Bombay as a Thanksgiving holiday extended-weekend getaway.
5. and subsequently how such information was known to the planners & attackers.
5. And the connection between Nariman/Chabad House and the border control efforts?
Hopefully the Indian authority (ies) will be more forthcoming in their investigation(s) as compared to what we experienced for Benazir Bhutto's murder.
Some six hours after the attack on Mumbai began on Wednesday night, Indian media organisations received an e-mail from an unknown group calling itself the Deccan Mujahideen claiming responsibility for the deadly, well-planned operation. "We want to warn the Indian government that they must stop the injustice against the Muslim community," the email warned.
Security experts however remained sceptical about the existence of the Deccan Mujahideen. Such emails have been issued in the past by other jihadi outfits that have attacked Indian cities. What was unusual this time was the fact that the message was written in Hindi, and not, as on all previous occasions, in English.
) 
. Only third world countries make such mistakes. 
