Ajmal Amir Qasab, the solitary terrorist captured in the Mumbai terrorist attack has revealed the locations of where he was trained to carry out the attack (Source: NDTV website). It is not a stretch of imagination to assume that a lot of others are being trained there too. So why aren't we demanding Pakistan raid those places? Personally I think Pakistan is an out and out terrorist state and will not agree to such an operation under any circumstances. The fact that this is due to an ineffectual government doesn't change a thing. Pakistan claimed that the terrorists were stateless. This should give it complete moral authority to raid these terrorist training camps as it would not constitute as an attack on its own citizens. But it will not and this is because the terrorists are Pakistanis and the Pakistan government knows this. It would much rather play a game of cat and mouse with the Indian government while Indians die rather than take any affirmative step that attempts to eradicate the sources of these problems.
What options does this leave us with?
Negotiating and trying to acheive results diplomatically has never worked with Islamic terrorism. When people are brainwashed from a young age they do not see any reason in anything other than what they have been told is right. As far as I know, wars that have been fuelled by religious ferver have never been quelled diplomatically. India-Pakistan diplomacy has never been effective in quelling terrorism and once again we are resorting to this to solve our problems.
What about an out and out military action like invading Pakistan? I don't think this will do any good either due to many obvious factors. As a friend of mine (Duh) rightly pointed out, the disparity in military might between India and Pakistan is not enough for us to achieve a speedy result. Furthermore, the fact that both countries have nuclear weapons will make the rest of the world shit in its collective pants and we can expect a lot of effective pressure to prevent a war (sanctions etc?). Furthermore, this will make it extremely easy for the extremists to recruit more terrorists.
I think selective bombing of the terrorist camps is a middle ground that we absolutely have to resort to. There is a reason we are seen as a soft target. It is because we never resort to military action proactively. This is definitely good upto a certain extent. We have been turning the other cheek long enough now. I think it is time to show the world and Pakistan that we have the resolve to kill if need be. I agree that there will be civilian casualities which will once again make it easier for extremists to recruit terrorists. However, this is the collateral damage that we have to accept in order to send a message. One is a fool to think there can be military action without civilian casualities, especially if these terrorists turn out to be like the Palestian extremists who hide in civilian populated areas knowing that when Israel bombs them there will be an international humanitarian outcry against it. Our plane is hijacked and we do nothing, our parliament is attacked and we do nothing, our institue of higher learning is attacked and we do nothing, our economic centre is attacked and we do nothing. What lines do these people have to cross after which we think pre-emptive strikes are warranted? To those who think this is still too extreme, I want them to tell me the number of innocent Indians that have to die after which such an action is okay.
Everyone is blaming the Indian politicians. I agree that they are very much responsible for being an incompetent bunch letting the country go to the dogs just to satisfy their selfish needs. But shouldn't this anger come after the anger towards Pakistan? Shouldn't we be trying to come up with ways to get to the root of the problem? Do people really think setting up a new terrorism task force or getting some politicans to resign will change things at a fundamental level? Imagine you are walking on a street and some guy shoves you down so hard that your arm breaks. What we are doing is ignoring this lunatic completely and going back to our negligent mother and blaming her for not feeding us enough calcium as a child.
I think I know why we do this.
We are scared to offend our muslim brethren.
People say that "terrorism knows no religion". What is this supposed to mean? That we should ignore the religious aspect of the attacks? Sorry but if 15 guys come from a muslim majority country into a Hindu majority country that has had strained relations with it rooted in partition (that was once again on religious lines) and specifically target a jewish settlement amongst others, while letting a Turkish couple go free because they are muslim, it has every fucking thing to do with religion.
If I was a muslim I would be insulted by those who say that this has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with religion, especially the wrong and maligned way Islam is used to brain wash the extremists. I would want to know that people understand this. By not talking about this at all, it makes me suspect that you secretly think I am somehow responsible for the actions of these terrorists. I would be offended because you assume that I put my religion before my country and so you dont want to offend me by bringing up religion. Sure India has its own communal problems, but is this really the time to be politically correct? In fact, is there any good time to be politically correct? I am confident that when the Imams of India refused to bury the terrorists, there was atleast one person whose wrong convictions about how all muslims in India are against India were atleast shaken a bit. I feel like this is the most effective path. We need to walk down this path to get to the root of this problem.
Now comes the question of personal responsibilty. Would I be willing to put my money where my mouth is? Which is to say, if India does end up bombing strategic parts of Pakistan and these events lead to a war, would I be willing to give up my cozy life in the US and go back to India to enlist and fight for my country? I honestly dont know. Anyone reading this can blame me for being a hypocrite and I accept the label. What I will stick by though is that this action is what I think is best for my country in the long run. Me being a hypocrite doesn't change the validity of my argument. To those who are ready to dismiss this option just based on my hypocrisy, I ask them what would their response be if a high ranking general of our army had put forward this?
We are being attacked and innocents are dying so often that it literally has become just another day in our lives. I really hope atleast this changes things and we will adopt a more effective approach to solve this problem rather than resort to impotent diplomacy!
What options does this leave us with?
Negotiating and trying to acheive results diplomatically has never worked with Islamic terrorism. When people are brainwashed from a young age they do not see any reason in anything other than what they have been told is right. As far as I know, wars that have been fuelled by religious ferver have never been quelled diplomatically. India-Pakistan diplomacy has never been effective in quelling terrorism and once again we are resorting to this to solve our problems.
What about an out and out military action like invading Pakistan? I don't think this will do any good either due to many obvious factors. As a friend of mine (Duh) rightly pointed out, the disparity in military might between India and Pakistan is not enough for us to achieve a speedy result. Furthermore, the fact that both countries have nuclear weapons will make the rest of the world shit in its collective pants and we can expect a lot of effective pressure to prevent a war (sanctions etc?). Furthermore, this will make it extremely easy for the extremists to recruit more terrorists.
I think selective bombing of the terrorist camps is a middle ground that we absolutely have to resort to. There is a reason we are seen as a soft target. It is because we never resort to military action proactively. This is definitely good upto a certain extent. We have been turning the other cheek long enough now. I think it is time to show the world and Pakistan that we have the resolve to kill if need be. I agree that there will be civilian casualities which will once again make it easier for extremists to recruit terrorists. However, this is the collateral damage that we have to accept in order to send a message. One is a fool to think there can be military action without civilian casualities, especially if these terrorists turn out to be like the Palestian extremists who hide in civilian populated areas knowing that when Israel bombs them there will be an international humanitarian outcry against it. Our plane is hijacked and we do nothing, our parliament is attacked and we do nothing, our institue of higher learning is attacked and we do nothing, our economic centre is attacked and we do nothing. What lines do these people have to cross after which we think pre-emptive strikes are warranted? To those who think this is still too extreme, I want them to tell me the number of innocent Indians that have to die after which such an action is okay.
Everyone is blaming the Indian politicians. I agree that they are very much responsible for being an incompetent bunch letting the country go to the dogs just to satisfy their selfish needs. But shouldn't this anger come after the anger towards Pakistan? Shouldn't we be trying to come up with ways to get to the root of the problem? Do people really think setting up a new terrorism task force or getting some politicans to resign will change things at a fundamental level? Imagine you are walking on a street and some guy shoves you down so hard that your arm breaks. What we are doing is ignoring this lunatic completely and going back to our negligent mother and blaming her for not feeding us enough calcium as a child.
I think I know why we do this.
We are scared to offend our muslim brethren.
People say that "terrorism knows no religion". What is this supposed to mean? That we should ignore the religious aspect of the attacks? Sorry but if 15 guys come from a muslim majority country into a Hindu majority country that has had strained relations with it rooted in partition (that was once again on religious lines) and specifically target a jewish settlement amongst others, while letting a Turkish couple go free because they are muslim, it has every fucking thing to do with religion.
If I was a muslim I would be insulted by those who say that this has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with religion, especially the wrong and maligned way Islam is used to brain wash the extremists. I would want to know that people understand this. By not talking about this at all, it makes me suspect that you secretly think I am somehow responsible for the actions of these terrorists. I would be offended because you assume that I put my religion before my country and so you dont want to offend me by bringing up religion. Sure India has its own communal problems, but is this really the time to be politically correct? In fact, is there any good time to be politically correct? I am confident that when the Imams of India refused to bury the terrorists, there was atleast one person whose wrong convictions about how all muslims in India are against India were atleast shaken a bit. I feel like this is the most effective path. We need to walk down this path to get to the root of this problem.
Now comes the question of personal responsibilty. Would I be willing to put my money where my mouth is? Which is to say, if India does end up bombing strategic parts of Pakistan and these events lead to a war, would I be willing to give up my cozy life in the US and go back to India to enlist and fight for my country? I honestly dont know. Anyone reading this can blame me for being a hypocrite and I accept the label. What I will stick by though is that this action is what I think is best for my country in the long run. Me being a hypocrite doesn't change the validity of my argument. To those who are ready to dismiss this option just based on my hypocrisy, I ask them what would their response be if a high ranking general of our army had put forward this?
We are being attacked and innocents are dying so often that it literally has become just another day in our lives. I really hope atleast this changes things and we will adopt a more effective approach to solve this problem rather than resort to impotent diplomacy!
19 comments:
yo sro...im glad for once ur asserting urself ..:D...i think it'll cause an all out war..the better way would be to make sure all other countries including the US, understand the implications of these terrorist camps...get some support..weigh it with the economic implications..and then definitely go in!
and no...war doesn't imply every able person needs to be enlisted in the army !
NOBODY will care about India than India. You think US will help us bomb terrorist camps in Pak? Rice has already asked India and Pak to calm down. US wont do shit if it has nothing to gain from it. The only way it will do something like this is if it has solid proof that Osama is hiding in Pakistan somewhere. What other countries? China? Russia? Middle East? Name one country which would be willing to do this with us? Maaaaaaaaybe Israel.
Economic implications? Of what kind? The cost of burying the number of victims due to terrorist attacks in India should exceed the cost of war?
War doesn't imply everyone should enlist. But me sitting here in my room and blogging about sending fellow citizens to war doesn't mean squat if I dont have the balls to do so myself. That was the point I was addressing.
Who is this anyway?
Viral?
no roman that wasn't me :)
though it is nice to see you being concerned about reality for a change!
my opinion - firstly, lets not give this behaviour a religion. that is fundamental to creating rifts among societies.
secondly, no military action is going change things. it will only win congress, or whichever party pulls it off, some brownie points. it will also let those morons recruit more people for their 'just cause of jihad'. evident examples are israel and the usa, the very nations you suggest to follow. they have always believed in military first but look at whats happening now - israel is negotiating with hezbollah and exchanging prisoners while the usa is ready to negotiate with north korea, iran and syria. it even negotiates with muqtada sadr in iraq. the only way, i think, we can change pakistan is through international pressure. but this should not be publicly announced. why? i was listening to this american security (not stocks :P) analyst who mentioned a very nice point - public pressure at a time when many in pakistan are still not sympathetic towards india or the us, will only put pressure on the government to defend itself by refuting allegations since any co-operation will be seen as a blow to its sovereignty. this becomes even more important after the recent period of incessant turmoil with musharraf being forced to step down and silly political parties being brought into power.
thirdly, why should pakistan come first? example - when you are home, do you lock your doors to prevent vandals from coming in or do you leave them open because there are cops outside to catch such vandals? when you see someone unknown at the door, do you ask questions? to me, this is more important than pointing fingers at pakistan, which is more like shrugging off our responsibilities. we need to make sure our doors are guarded so well that no silly element gets through and this allows us to move freely in our home. that is where our efforts should be focused. and i dont think politicians are to blame - honestly - well not entirely at least. think of politics as business - mgmt (politicians/ bureaucrats) give the customers (voters) what they want. right now the customers that matter are those who give importance to religion/ caste et al and thus, you have politics that caters to it.
finally, my thoughts on the way forward. first, we need to stop writing and come out in the open as one group. this goes specifically to the people who know that there is something wrong with the system and also bear the capability to identify the issue and correct them. at this given time, it is necessary that everyone in this category come out because we are in a minority. we need mass. 40,000 blogs or petitions with 50 names don't make things move - but 1 petition with 2,000,000 names might do something.
secondly, we need to step out. the only people reading your blog are people who have access to internet and have probably written similar thoughts. whats the point of 100 people reading and writing the same thing over and over again. i call it a waste of good brain cells. we need to reach out to people outside the internet and to educate them (not getting them through iit) but helping them move beyond social restraints of caste and religion. we need to make them think about their right to basic necessities like food, water, economic liberty and security. this may sound a bit generic - but my belief is that terrorism is a symptom of a disease. the disease, to a large extent, is illiteracy and poverty. if we can channel our energy to eradicating these, i am quite certain the situation will change for the better. i don't know how much time it will take but i do know the sooner we start the lesser time it will take.
hope this makes sense
viral
good writing ro :)
"concerned about reality for a change"? :) Do not assume that whatever I post on my blog is the be all and end all of everything that goes on in my head. Proof is this is that there is not one naked photo of Gillian Anderson on here!
Anyway,
Regarding your first point, I completely disagree as I made it explicitly clear in my original post. You are doing exactly what I think we shouldnt be doing. This terrorism has deep roots in religion and ignoring it will not help reach an effective solution.
Secondly, US and Israel have reached the stage of negotiations only because the countries they are up against have seen what they are capable of militarily and they know that they have no option but to come to the negotiation table. I agree that pure military action has not achieved great results. What I am saying is when it comes to the religious extremists, it seems like a rite of passage where you have to show these people that you are ready to kill too and only then will they think of another alternative.
Your third point is again something that I was extremely explicit about in my post. To take up your analogy, sure our house needs better guards. That doesn't mean we completely ignore the team of bandits who are repeatedly breaking in and concentrate all our energies on shouting at the guards.
Finally, most definitely illiteracy and poverty are causes that make it easier for people to turn into terrorists. But here is a thought, India is home to millions of poor people. Why aren't there countless terrorists budding from our country? My point is that addressing only the socio-economic issues might not be sufficient.
Also, tell me whom do you want to educate? The lower classes in India? The lower classes in Pakistan?
yo
lets go pointwise:
first, i knew you would come back with this. i should have been clearer. if you go to bihar, there is something called MCC which fights for people of lower caste against the Ranvir Sena which proclaims itself to be the defender of higher caste. who dies - innocents. Go out to Meerut and try hanging out with a girl (be it you own sister), someone from VHP will come around and beat you up for being indecent. Go down south and you know sickles are used more to cut down people than harvest fields. The Khalistanis are Sikhs. There are skinheads proclaiming themselves to be the purest race. My point here is - how do you define terrorism? We seem to have publicised terrorists as people carrying AK-47s and grenades. But I say anyone who tries to scare me into changing my lifestyle is a terrorist. And then you'll find terrorists in every religion.
These terrorists do not believe in any religion, as per me. They create an interpretation of the religious scriptures to their advantage. The only reason they are able to take advantage is that people do not have the understanding to question them and do not have access to basic necessities in life. You work for pay not for righteousness else you would be in charity.
second - you are absolutely wrong in the case of Israel and USA. I would suggest you go back to the 1 month war between Israel and Hezbollah. Israel bombed Lebanon and Palestine after 2 of its soldiers were kidnapped. They killed 1000 people with the aim of dismantling the Hezbollah infrastructure. What happened? Israel had to back off without any success. Their government and army accepted that they could not achieve their objectives. Hezbollah won the elections after that. And very recently, Israel accepted to exchange 200 prisoners for those 2 soldiers. Is this Hezbollah being scared of Israel's military capacity? I would think otherwise. Lets talk about the US. For the past 3 years, the US said it will not talk to Iran over the nuclear issue and kept on trying to pass sanctions against the country. What happened? Nothing. Iran now has centrifuges. It has tacit support of Russia and China. The US has now initiated some dialogue with Iran. I really don't know where you see the fact that these countries realized what US and Israel can do militarily. Honestly, if anything, the American (and correspondingly Israeli) military capacity has reduced, largely due to its adventure in Iraq.
Coming to internal-external issue. You design your national security by keeping in mind the external elements. This is quite basic. And yes, we should kill them as justice demands but not by flying over Pakistan. You will have another Hezbollah here. You can't kill something that lives among people because people are the foundation of everything a group/society/nation is. A single strike by India will probably add another thousand to their ranks. What's the gain?
third - i will start again by asking how you define a terrorist? is he/she a person who carries an AK47 or is it someone who is not allowing you to live freely? I prefer the latter. and if you look around, i am confident you will find millions of such people in India. the People's War Group, CPI(ML), SIMI, Naxalites (similar to PWG), ULFA, Mizo group, VHP, Bajrang Dal, MNS (these are my entries) and all the other criminals (including some politicians). leaving the last few, most of them are in it because of poverty and illiteracy.
Once again, solve the primary issue and you will have a chance to succeed. If by lower class you mean the economically underprivileged, then yes we should educate them. at the same time you want to ensure that people creating the skew are also brought in. and let's just stick to india.
if i have a good burglar alarm, strong well-armed guards and dwellers who are more aware, of course all motivated to protect the house, i don't see why i would have to waste time screaming at the burglars.
btw - gillian anderson is quite hot. i was watching last king of scotland yesterday - and she still looks good.
Viral,
I wont go so far as calling you an apologist for the terrorists but you definitely represent the exact demographic at whom my post is aimed.
Regarding first and third points: How does it matter how do I define a terrorist? And do not bring in atrocities committed by others when we are talking about external Islamic terrorism from Pakistan here. All this talk about what a terrorist is/what are his needs/why does he become that is of no use except to make yourself feel intellectual. Sure it will help if they are willing to sit down and talk to you. But force is the only thing these people will understand. And once again you are chickening with regards to religion. These people exploit Islam and we need to address that. Ignoring it will not help.
"You can't kill something that lives among people because people are the foundation of everything a group/society/nation is. A single strike by India will probably add another thousand to their ranks. What's the gain?"
Like I asked in my post, give me a number of innocent Indians that need to be dead after which you are okay with killing some innocent Pakistanis?
Regarding US and Israel, you are saying force exerted by US and Israel has not achieved results and now they are resorting to diplomacy and negotiations. My point is that it is because US and Israel showed the gumption to kill, their enemies also realized that it will only be a back and forth killing and things need to be moved to the negotiation table.
This is where India is faltering. Everytime we are attacked we try to be understanding of why these people have become terrorists and what can be done in a non-violent way to help and shit like this while people on the other side mock our country and continue attacking us.
It is basic law of nature dude. If you arent willing to stand up for yourself, you will get rolled over. Going to pretentious therapy sessions afterwards will not change the fact that you got fucked!
Sorry viral but you have not told me a single thing that would even begin to affect my perspective on this!
:) strong words. and you are free to have your opinion and change it when you feel like. i do not have a consultant's slideshow ready to convert people. and moreover i feel you are quite angered right now to consider reason.:)
1. we have enough people who use our hindu religion to beat up people. are they not wrong? i dont hear you saying anything about them even though they are sitting right at home. being misled is again a symptom. we need to understand why someone is easily misled by these guys and solve that problem. i believe its because of their economic and social status. its just how our society is structured. i am speaking only about indians. pakistanis have had a different history and we can talk about that later.
one question - why shouldn't 'terrorists' be considered normal criminals? is dying by an AK47 really that different from dying by a knife? i don't care what the motive is because a roadside mob/goon is just as fatal as a 'terrorist'. i don't know how this is intellectual - it appears more of common sense to me but that may due to our different information set.
2. once again you are wrong, might i say, on many fronts and i don't know how much of middle eastern politics and events you have read but my gut feeling is not enough. it will take a good amount of time to go through that to show you that it is the USA and Israel who have said 'ok I think we need to talk'. The other party was always there. It is their attitude that 'everything can be resolved by putting a bullet through their head' which has resulted in the chaos that we are in. furthermore, if gun is the only thing they understand and guns will solve the problem, i really fail to understand why hezbollah is still considered a threat and why people hail the organization in lebanon and other arab countries.
now you mention a good point - 'back and forth killing'. is that what we really want to get into? we can get into it very easily but you need to realize the very serious ramifications it could have. first, more people become sympathetic towards their 'mission. second, the army gets a reason to possibly once again overthrow the government. third, you have no idea who controls the nukes there. are you really willing to take the chance? you tell me how many indian innocents must die because we attack any one of these camps? fourth, if the pakistani army is engaged on the eastern front, western pakistan goes to dogs and there you have taliban-reborn. at least right now they have to fight to live.
3. as to where india is faltering - i suggest go and read up on indias history. you need to understand the world india was born into, its legacies and the geo-politics in play. it is only now that we have amicable relations with most western countries. go back a decade or two and you will see a different story. that is why india has always had to sit down quiet. and right now we do not want to instigate an unnecessary war for reasons i mentioned above.
overall, i think you are failing to understand that no organization can exist without people. you have the planners, the executors and the support. the 'terrorists' need to enter india to commit any of their acts. for that they need a support base here. I want to target the support. they are everyday normal people but are poor. when one does not have money to buy himself even a single meal, i bet he would be willing to take up any job that gives him some money to spend on him and his family. he wouldn't think twice as to what the consequence would be because so far no one cared about him so far so why should he now. that is who i want to target. if we can alleviate these guys, i believe the organization will not be able to generate enough support.
i suggest you go and read up on indian demographics and how they have changed over the past decade or so. also read about the economic and social status of the different sections. you will probably see more of what i am saying, unless of course you think its tedious and you'd rather go for a swim. it is, of course, easier to just ask indians to bash up pakistanis :)
Ok, Viral you do agree that you want to target the support group. How do you propose that be done? In what Ro and several others suggest, we try to eliminate the support group by bombing them out of existence. If not, what is a potential initiative? Don't take this question as being sarcastic or rhetorical, but I am sincerely interested in knowing if there is any alternative.
In fact, I have another question. People say let us not respond in a military style, and let us sit and think. Just like Ro says how long does it take us before India's war is acceptable, I am also interested in knowing that how long would it take before people begin to 'think' about solutions to this problem. In the past, even though India has openly had itself f***ed, people have said that we shouldn't attack and that we should think. In a country that boasts so many bright people, has it been that difficult to come up with a peaceful alternative in this entire time? If they haven't there probably isn't one. But still, I am interested in knowing if there are any.
Economy and education are definite solutions. A friend made a good point in a similar debate, that India has definitely focused on its economy at the cost of not investing in its military, while Pak is not in a particularly great state. In fact, along the lines of US-Israel, I think one point that was missed out is that US can do whatever it wants because it is an economic super-power. People are not going to be able to do shit. Therefore, economy and education will help....in the long run.
Now, this brings my final (hopefully?) point. Viral, you are spot on with the fact that there are organizations/people in India, who could be (and should be) branded as terrorists. But this is where I choose to talk about a lesser evil. These recent terrorist attacks have put India into an unsafe place in the international view. You might say, 'XYZ is a moron to make such lists', but unfortunately XYZ is also a major part of the world economy, which our economy and hence by all the arguments, our security depends upon. Therefore, I feel it important to deal with cross-border terrorism much more.
More so, just the fact that there are terrorists in India does not give us leeway to say that we shall not address the recent attacks. India would prefer to zero down its efforts to factors that are under its control in this anti-terrorism battle, and to that effect, we need to be able to take our mind off cross-border terrorism. Therefore, I feel that it is definitely of immediate importance to take extreme steps to send across a message, be it military or non military.
For long, we as a country, have sat and discussed and discussed, while India gets raped. It is outrageous as to how many times there have been bomb blasts in the last year. Today, there is infiltration across the pakistani border. Tomorrow, the terrorists in the north east will take solace in this, and increase their activities there. Finally, one day China will also move in with its quest for Arunachal Pradesh and beyond. And yet ... people will propose to talk and discuss.
War does not imply that you just take a gun, go out and shoot everyone possible. There are smart tacticians involved in every war. If we have not been able to come up with any non-military solution to curb cross-border terrorism so far, I would like to give the military a chance to 'think' and make 'wise decisions' for attacking the terrorist camps, so that we could minimize the collateral damage and still maximize the damage of the 'support group' for such activities.
Finally, I really want to know if all this discussion is going to get over? The media is going to talk about India being angry, we are all going to blog/comment and express differing views. But, sadly given the current circumstance, I don't see how it is going to reduce the chance of the next cross-border terrorist attack.
Viral...
We will keep going back and forth like this forever so you can have the last word in this (afer this comment of mine).
1) Once again you are trying to avoid the basic Islamic terrorism that is the problem at hand and bringing up other relatively irrelevant things (like Hindu terrorism). Let me ask you this...if you consider a goon who stabs you as the same as a terrorist who kills you with a AK-47, why is that you are okay with the cops raiding the goons neighbourhood to arrest him and throw him in jail but for the case of the terrorist you want understand where he comes and what can we do to make his life better?
2) The other party was always there. Are you seriously suggesting that US and Israel's enemies were always willing to talk??? You are making it sound as if the terrorists are resonable people who kill a few civilians and are willing to talk and figure things out peacefully while the big bad great satans that are US and Israel do not want to do so!
3) Surely I do not know enough about our country's history as much as you do. But let me ask you one thing. My entire post was about Pakistan but you steadfastly have refused to even acknowledge that the basic problem lies there and not here. Also, when exactly is a military option okay with you? Are you suggesting that we should keep trying to address the problem at home and ignore Pak altogether. Let me tell you what will happen. You and I will be teaching poor kids in some slum about the importance of education and giving them money or jobs whereas the insurgents will definitely find someone else to help them with their killings!
hehe - this has been fun but either i am really bad at explaining things or you dont want to understand my point. this is going to be the last of it all! :)
for golu:
1. you are not bombing the support out. you bomb the planners and executioners. i am talking of the support base within india.
2. your military option is going to be just as long and probably more defeating overall because you will have spent so much money chasing them instead of growing more responsible citizens.
3. you are right about us sitting and discussing. if you acknowledge the point, i suggest you should act or stop commenting and asking others to act. i cant say i have done anything to that end as of now, but i hope next year i will get involved in something.
for ro:
1. you brought up an interesting point but did you think about why it is easier for the cops to round up goons at home? because it is their home! it is basic reasoning - when you are not influential, try not to act as if you are because you'll only put your foot in your mouth. i think right now is a very good time for india to increase international pressure on pakistan and do so without publicity. this is, however, a short term solution.
2. once again you spoke without minding what's really transpired over the past five decades. go read about middle east and then discuss this because you don't know shit.:) don't read out fox news to me. go watch this - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6604775898578139565
nobody is born a terrorist. he is made into one. it sounds right out of a movie but unfortunately it is a fact.
3. i am not denying that pakistan is part of the problem. but i am against any direct military action. i'd rather try to work out things so as to avoid any military action. the only time when a military action would be appropriate will be when we have made sure they do not have nukes. take a simple example - why hasn't the USA ever attacked North Korea. because they have nukes and ICBMs. you really dont want a nuke going off in your country.
i am quite disappointed by your pessimistic view. are you suggesting that education of people will not do anything? that has got to be the silliest assumption. when i say we need to reach out to the 'support base', i am also confident we won't be able to reach out to everyone on day one. but you have to start. it will grow exponentially. of course, you will see some people you cannot connect with, but the majority will be with you. the whole point is to create so much control internally that no external element finds it easy to walk in.
anyhow - its been a good discussion. we should meet sometime and discuss it all. :)
once again, if you acknowledge that we have been thinking and discussing for too long, become part of the solution and act.
Actually viral it is very frustrating. In the end, I don't agree that being too aggressive like Ro and me is going to help. But at the same time, being too passive (non-aggressive?) like you has not done the cause any good so far. I believe that in a saner state of mind, I would hope for a solution in between of controlled aggression.
But what frustrates me more is that I cannot do anything for this, more so because of the fact that I am not in India. I know it is easier said than done, that if I were back home I could have helped in some possible way, but it is even more frustrating to be elsewhere and hence be practically of no use. There was a meeting in Hopkins last week to discuss what things people could do, and it was just appalling as to what people were proposing. Someone cited an analogy of the US elections and said we should be active in blogs!! Some other idiot mentioned economy and spoke NONSENSE about 'the boom of semi-conductor technology in Malaysia' and 'we should improve economy of Afghanistan', while some other chap spoke about 'spreading love'. I know that we can only talk and argue incessantly about the military angle, but I am really desperate to know what can I as an Indian in a foreign land, do for my country back home. THAT I am ready to discuss.
golu - very true. thou hast hit the right cord.
i do not consider myself passive. i would love to see the hideouts getting blown up. but it just isn't practical which is why i choose the other route.
actually i would the say the same thing for me - i dont think i have the right to argue unless i have done something myself. but cutting to the chase, i think india would really benefit from whatever knowledge you bring in. however, if you want to be more india-specific, my suggestion would be to try and understand the social dynamics here and figure out projects/ technology/ research which could be implemented to create awareness by integrating them with the larger society. all this while ensuring it isn't something that they cannot readily accept or a fairytale like the $100 laptop.
why do i say this? i don't trust the government is going to show any seriousness to creating awareness. i totally believe it is onto us to stand up and take charge. this is not a 2 month initiative - it will probably take years to cover the whole ground so you do not have to be here right now physically to do something. i'd rather have you, and others like you, identify solutions keeping india in mind.
as long as we work towards the same goal, how does it matter if you deliver the goods from london, virginia or bombay.
chalo enough bickering at ro's expense.
ro i have two words for ya - give up!! :)
Why did people wait until the Mumbai drama before writing tonne loads of stuff?
Was it the CNN coverage, I wonder? What if the blasts/shootings had happened one month ago, during the height of the US presidential elections? Would you have cared? If you would've, why the eff didn't you write about blasts in Hyd, B'lore, Jaipur and god knows where else.
Like Viral says- you are way too involved at the moment to think rationally. Or, were you ever?
-Malini.
Malini,
A lot of people have been apathetic so far. It is obvious from the pulse of the nation that this mumbai attack has been a tipping point for many. I am simply one of those people. Surely I am at fault for just going through anger-sadness-resignation cycles during all the previous attacks instead of doing anything. Heck, even now my stupid post explaining what I feel is not going to lead to anything substantial. This was meant to express my frustration at the way things have been and are being handled in India with regards to all the attacks so far and what I think we as a nation should be doing. I am well aware of its standing in the grand scheme of things and have no delusions whatsoever.
I am going to assume you have a solid moral platform on which you are able to stand and lecture me about my inadequate responses.
Coming to the part about me being irrational, I am fairly certain that this will be my position unless new developments occur. It is not a question of my irrational anger ebbing away with time. I also strongly believe everyone has a breaking point. People who say we have to think and act carefully now will break ultimately if these attacks continue. From the way I see things, it will only be a matter of time.
Malini,
I read your comment and then in this order - smirked, stared at the screen, let my jaw drop, was shocked and said in no equivocal terms....please do pardon my French here - 'WHAT THE FUCK'. I cannot believe that you would compare this to the US elections? It just goes to show where YOUR damn priorities are, and I would like to request you to stop living your life vicariously through others.
Now, it is a fact that different people have different tolerance levels. For starters, just because one doesn't blog or, in particular tell you about one's disgruntlement, it does NOT imply that we weren't involved in the aftermath of the earlier attacks. I was equally disturbed earlier and the pressure has built up quite a lot now to reach the popping point. Why? Earlier, the very incident of terrorism was short-lived when the bombs went off and the aftermath was equally gruesome. This time it was much more emotionally and mentally tasking to see your country held hostage for 3 days by 10 people who just walked in. Earlier it was done in stealth. This time the people had the audacity to come out and do it in the damn open. That is what has angered us the most, and hence people have reacted in larger numbers this time.
What kind of ridiculous and stupid argument is it to not react to an incident, just because I didn't react earlier. I would love to fill in the choicest of abuses here, but I shall refrain. In short, it is exactly due to this fucked up attitude that we are not going to get anywhere. People like you will keep saying that you didn't do anything last time so why are you reacting now. Therefore, even the few 10% of the people who are enthused to do something constructive will be put off even before they start doing something. Economy, security, education, corruption - these are all things that need to be addressed IRRESPECTIVE of the terrorism issue. I want to know why people have not thought about those things until this attack? Apart from these things that are essential for the growth of our country anyways, I want to know what can be done SPECIFIC to the cross-border terrorism problem.
Finally coming to the rational part. I would really like to hear your rational views upon treating the rational gentlemen who rationally fire at random people for extremely rational reasons. And while you are at that, why don't you ask them how many cubes of sugar they would like with their tea?
First of all, let me say that I appreciate your views. Let's not make this personal, as it often gets.
Rohit,
Do you seriously think that the militant groups are at the same address now? Bomb the whole fucking land, eh?
Let's touch base in a month's time and see how you are faring.
Golu,
All I was saying is this: due to the fact that there was extensive media coverage this time and some smart bastards coined the term "India's 9-11"- lot more people have gotten riled up, especially desis in the US. That's my gripe with the media. Make this sensational and make all other events persona non-grata.
If these bombings had happened in say "Gayatri Bhavan, King & Cardinal and Morine Cafe" and no foreigners involved in the carnage - all else being equal, chances are you wouldn't be riled up because you wouldn't have had that much media coverage about the incident. That's my point - in long!
I also bet my last cent (down to that almost) that if this event had happened a few days before Obama was declared President, all we would have seen would've been a short footnote on page 3. That's the point I was trying to make, again, in long!
Thanks for clearly stating what bugged you the most - "lack of stealth". If you are really pissed off about that, then direct that anger towards the passive attitude of the inactive Govt that we elected through our own apathy. Where was the Govt. intelligence after all the previous attacks?
Their inactivity continued even after US warnings about a marine attack.
More about stealth - How did you react during the Gujarat riots? Wasn't that blatant and "unstealthy" as as well? Just curious!
The rational view would be to hope that the Govt. we elected takes sensible action and gets to the bottom of this. If not, vote for change and go and be part of that change! Heaven knows we need smart people out there.
I believe that a life lost is a life lost - no matter what the accompanying drama. That's my take on things. I know through friends (journalists, incidentally) that it's been hell for all involved. I hope and wish that people responsible for this are brought to task but, I disagree with the title of the post.
We bomb Pakistan, rest assured that we will be in a long war of attrition that will sap our country of money and time that's better spent in other spheres. US does blatant bombings because its shores are secure. Canada and Mexico will always be passive allies. India cannot afford the same attitude. Plus, the US will push for no Indian action as war will mean no Pakistani troops fighting the Afghani Taleban - bad news for the US. Use the sensitivity of the situation to push Pakistan into cleaning up its act.
And, move full steam ahead and get the National Intelligence up to speed. That's the key! And, give the Indian troops some new ammo too, please!
-You know who!
ghuys
i think we've all strecthed it out too far now.
overall, all of us want action whether it be military or otherwise. i think we should use our energy to attaining those goals rather than bicker amongst ourselves and sap whatever motivation we might have.
we need people like us to be working together towards the common goal of a better india, if i may assume that's the case.
i suggest we drop this here and move forward and try to figure out how each one of us can assist the movement.
thank you all :)
Anurag,
Nobody was making it personal before your comment! Just saying! :)
Do you seriously think that the militant groups are at the same address now? Bomb the whole fucking land, eh?
Bombing the whole country is not an option. I made that clear! If there was no way to track the militants I wonder how Pakistan managed to nab a couple of their leaders (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7772554.stm).
Media sensationalism plays a role no doubt. But your premise that this would not have been big news if it had happened few days before the election is I feel incorrect. There is no way to predict an alternate reality but I think this would have been news anyway merely due to the fact that it went on for 60hours!
Anyway you can have the last word and I will let it go.
As Viral says, lets think of something constructive to do. Maybe we do something about absentee voting for NRI's as a first step???
http://www.a2znri.org/
Point taken Malini (A****g ga waste fellow). You've put your points across more clearly now, and I have to say that your earlier comment was nowhere along these lines. But yes, I couldn't agree more with you on most of the points.
Quite rightly, Barkha Dutt had been criticized a lot about her reporting style. She did respond to that and the article is available at NDTV's site, but I think she very cleverly managed to avoid addressing the raised questions and made the disgruntled look like the bad guys. But sensationalism was at its max in 'We the people', which is also available on the website. I don't know how many people watched that thing, but personally I felt it was a disgrace. First of all the panel was a joke. I can understand that politicians were not ready to turn up on the panel. No offence to Luke Kenny, he is great at what he does. But if you are telling me that he is the next best qualified informed person to be on a panel for such debates, I seriously think my intelligence is being insulted. Same goes for most of the rest. That debate was awful and ended on an ugly note, because the panel and the moderator were screwed up.
Ok, I swear I won't reply any more because this is going to degenerate into bickering over those same old points. At the same time Viral, I do feel it is good to have discussions in person about such things. For example, if I have some opinions that are very extreme, such discussions might help bring me towards a more rational and practical view.
Post a Comment