Can America finish terrorism alone ?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by aneeshm
The more they are antagonised , the more they will retaliate , as they have no other way of striking back.

I agree we are in something of a catch-22. If we do nothing they attack; if we do something they attack. The only real solution, absolute crushing brutality a la the Mongols or other ancient or medieval empires, isn't acceptable in the modern world so we are stuck striking down the worst offenders and attempting to persuade people away from religious fundamentalism.

[DanS]

The closest thing that I could see for you that is similar is Pakistan government-supported terrorism.

Al Qaeda was like an expeditionary force of some 5,000 Arab soldiers. It required logistics, funding and fund-raising, recruiting, sophisticated planning, training, compartmentalized information, and extensive liasion with governments and other terrorist groups.

Do you have any similar terrorist organizations in India?

[Arrian]

People are scared when the anniversary of 9/11 comes around , no ?

Maybe. No one I know.

-Arrian

[Dinner]

Originally posted by aneeshm
In a span of fifty years , we have lost over a million , I repeat a million people .

I doubt the million figure is just from terrorist actions alone. No doubt it also includes the war dead from the three wars India and Pakistan have fought since Independence from the UK in 1949.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DanS
Do you have any similar terrorist organizations in India?

India has a number of smaller and less well organized terrorist groups. Nearly all of them say they are fighting for Kashmir.

[Bereta_Eder]

11 September was also the date Aliente was overthrown in Chile. Ironic that.

Besides that with the US support to Pakistan, you have new troubles I think.

[DanS]

Oerdin: My argument is that because they are less well organized and smaller groups, they are much less vulnerable to traditional military action. Al Qaeda was bigger and was reasonably vulnerable to traditional military action (or at least action, US style). They were also potentially a lot more lethal.

[aneeshm]

The smaller they are , the harder they are to fight . And Al-Qaeda is still alive and functioning , just more covertly . Nobody knows how many operatives they have in the US , just waiting for the word of command .

Yes , people start to get scared not for themselves , but uncertain as to the general level of safety in a country .

Well USA is said deserved it.
What have you done?

We have done nothing except fooloshly trust the United Nations . The ceasefite thay mandated was the main cause of the stalemate that has been there for the past fifty years . No dispute , no oppression (Kashmir , in fact , elected to join us ) . We are also hated for our democracy and progress (we are much , much better than most nations of the Middle East and Pakistan in terms of personal freedom ) .

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by DanS
Do you have any similar terrorist organizations in India?

Yes , we have many (the lashkar-e-toiba , jaish-e-mohammed , to take two of the largest) .

[Bereta_Eder]

Could I ask you, because I don't know, if the population in Kashmir is mainly muslim or Hindu?

[aneeshm]

Even though they are mainly Muslim , the sentiment is pro-indian (they have seen what both nations have to offer ) . To give an example , cable TV operators in Pakistan are on strike , protesting their government's decision to ban Indian channels for vulgarity (Family soaps are vulgar , Baywatch is just pure fun for the family , no ? ) . The figures , don't forget , also take into account the huge losses of counterinsurgency operations .

[Bereta_Eder]

Yes, I bet they being muslim is the perfect "excuse" for the Pakistani dictatorship to want to grab the land.
Sounds a lot like Cyprus actually where the turkish cypriotes themselves demonstrated in the streets calling to Greece and the EU to save them.

[aneeshm]

But the point is , they dont want to join Pakistan . Thay want , in fact notning more than peace , and India is the better choice for the future , as thay will get peace either way (either through joining Pakistan or India) .

Back on topic , should the USA be supporting such regimes ? Is it in their own long-term interests to pursue this unilateral policy of supporting some dictators , deposing others , and not giving a damn to so many democracies (with us being the biggest , by the way) .

[Bereta_Eder]

About your first point I agree. that's what I saying too about the turkish cypriots.

About the US, that's US. I'm sure you know what it's about. If not you'll soon find out.

And to your question. No ofcourse it's not right to support the Pakistani dictatorship while saying it wants to combat international terrorism.
It would be very funny if human lives weren't being lost because of this.

[aneeshm]

What is it about ? The oil ? The poll ratings (my money's on this ) ? Having a second base in the region (other than Israel) ? The US does not realise that they creating , for every minuthe they stay in Iraq , another terrorist . The lives lost are not just your problem . They are ours too . But mark my words , the US will suffer horribly for it's policies if it doesn't change them soon enough . Dubya will go down in history as a power-crazed pupped in the hands of his advisors , who let terrorism become a bigger problem . The only way of combating terrorism by brute force is through covert operations , NOT through a set of hugely publicised wars . Had this huge ruckus not been created , the Al-Queda leadership would have been easier to fing and destroy .