Battle Of Mumbai..Your thoughts..

[bockscar]

Bali is always a safe place to go. enjoy....

read in yahoo that Mumbai did not have SWAT unit to combat emergency situation. I wonder is Singapore has such facility also or not.

hope its safe. must go there with clear mind . haha.

aus govt advised their people to reconsider going bali

 

[dir]

I seriously think terrorism is a blown-up issue.

yeah no kidding

your argument is flawed, I think what you're trying to say is humans are inherently violent, not inherently terrorists. This terrorism phenomena is relatively new, especially considering the surge in attacks post-911.

The French revolution has nothing to do with terrorism. It's a violent joint-struggle to eliminate contradictions in the social classes and henceforth caused a worldwide revolution by overthrowing feudalism.

Terrorism is a bunch of men getting together to randomly targeting innocents and using guerilla tactics to further a religious viewpoint. It will never cause a revolution because religion has no place in secular politics.

also, I just wanna add that the recent movie 'Traitor', starring Don Cheadle is pretty good, if somewhat preachy, and tries to demonstrate the breadth of Muslim philosophy, while condemning terrorism.

 

[empihsrow]

The French revolution has nothing to do with terrorism. It's a violent joint-struggle to eliminate contradictions in the social classes and henceforth caused a worldwide revolution by overthrowing feudalism.

Terrorism is a bunch of men getting together to randomly targeting innocents and using guerilla tactics to further a religious viewpoint. It will never cause a revolution because religion has no place in secular politics.

That is not true. Terrorism didn't happen because of religion and yes, terrorism is guerilla warfare. And no, terrorism is not a new concept. People just coin it terrorism recently.

The French Revolution first sprouted the modern idea of terrorism. During the period of the Reign of Terror during the Revolution, radical factions used the idea of guerilla warfare and the guillotine as a mean of coercing people because of intense rivalry. Read up if you like. It might not sound like terrorism to you, but look, it happened two centuries ago. Guerilla warfare has definitely evolved.

I don't think my argument is flawed and I don't think I'm in a dreamland. Why don't you guys view from my point of view instead of labeling it as flawed? I know it's never right for a man to take another's life but innocents have been killed throughout the ages of men. It will ALWAYS happen. So maybe we have to take it into our stride that yes, innocents get killed and will get killed. I'm just trying to say, live with it. Terrorists exist and we can't weed them out.

I see today's terrorism more of a religious plot than anything else. Islam extremists and insurgents always get onto the newspaper and actually, I wonder why. I believe Islam extremists actually make up a small percentage of global terrorism. And when I say terrorism got into big lights, I mean the Bush administration lit up the whole idea of terror and actually escalated the dramas/deaths/horror that terrorism had inflicted on us[surge of terrorism ever since 911]. Oh, by the way, the Crusade was also a religious plot. A total outbreak of war doesn't make it even less different than guerilla war. It's still war. Innocents are killed. The Crusaders are notorious for blazing through villages and towns at an alarming rate[Reminds me of the Nazi's Blitzkrieg]. Besides, the Crusaders didn't only target Muslims. Jews, pagan believers, political enemies were also targeted.

Concerning the death of a Singaporean and the plight of Africa, I must tell you that poverty is high throughout Africa. I'm not trying to say I'm looking down on them, but we all know that Africa is a suffering continent with an AIDS epidemic. I'm using the death of a Singaporean to compare because I want to tell you guys there are many things more in this world than terrorism. Poverty, epidemics, internal wars are killing more people in Africa than terrorism. When people blow up terrorism and take into account that 145 people were killed in the Mumbai battle, do they actually remember that not long ago in Rwanda, hundred of thousands of people were killed[Slaughtered is a better word, actually] and the world actually stood by?

That is the reason why I believe terrorism is blown up by the media and governments.

I won't feel sad or even intend to take revenge if any one close to me ever got killed by terrorism. I will just curse my luck. These things are unpredictable and to grief, you're just doing what terrorists want you to do. If I'm gonna spend my whole life chasing these terrorists and blaming them for my misfortune, I'll just be chasing shadows and getting stuck.

It's much more mature and rational to go on with life and discover the possibilities of life we can never imagine. We never know today's terrorism can ever create a revolution. We live too short to tell if they really actually can, and who knows? The world hundred years later might be totally different.

One more note to add. I find the death of the five Jews totally absurd. They were, really, totally innocent and they aren't even involved with Kashmir! I understand if they target the Hindus, but the Jews?

 

[Mobius]

Terrorism, I afraid, is going to stay on for a while. First, its cheaper than a full scale war. Second it creates maximum impact with today's media coverage. Thirdly it has the element of surprise, which in turn will maximize its impact.

 

[fuzztremecho]

bro emphishrow

"I believe Islam extremists actually make up a small percentage of global terrorism"
-qoute by you...

as a former civil servant with a privy of insider knowledge and experience...this very false belief, I might add by the West and some other governments were the very cause of 9/11..
and the aftermath of the scale of attacks we are witnessing thereafter..

even a predominantly Muslim nation like Indonesia was not spared..the tentacles of their reach is global with a single unifying factor..

the purpose of me starting this thread was to share information and gather thoughts from fellow bros/sis in Soft..

elder bros who had done their national obligations, I feel, have a more firm grasp of the surroundings around us..do not get me wrong Bro..I am not belittling you but the POVs of bro Whitestrat and others were sound..

the terror network recruits young impressionable minds,instilling "me vs the world" mentality in them..spoonfeeding them with ideals of Freedom,Oppression,Rebellion,Chaste and Empathy...FORCE in intel-speak..

Freedom - fighting for your belief/ideals/religion/motherland
Oppression - believing that the status quo are evil/immoral
Rebellion - to wage war by any means necessary
Chaste - believing that being pure in action/mind
Empathy - believing that others are suffering the same..in this case fellow Muslims..

my friend..you will make a suitable trainee if there were recruiters here...

 

[rottenramone]

i was bringing ard a group of iraqi officials ard and they told me the same. terror orgs usually recruit young impressionable teens... cos they wanted to belong. but he told me that the ones in iraq are divided along tribal lines, not so much over fundamentalism.

giving them an opportunity to do something worthwhile is a good distraction.

 

[fuzztremecho]

bro RR
thanks for that info bro...something new for me..tribal lines..

 

[rottenramone]

iraq is full of surprises man. the dude's name is arabic (labeed abbawi) but turns out he christian. apparently there's plenty of iraqi christians and jews, and throw in the mandaens and the ppl who still have ishtar in their altars as well.

i gained a deeper understanding of the cradle of civilization.

 

[fuzztremecho]

yup..Arabic is just a language...it does not tell about a person's faith..

Saddam Hussein trusted right hand man..his spokesperson to the Western world..Tariq Al-Aziz is a Christian..

there were certain number of Jews and Christians in the old regime cabinet..the irony is that they do not trust the Shia Muslims..as Saddam and his cabinet were predominantly Sunni Muslims..

 

[dir]

That is not true. Terrorism didn't happen because of religion and yes, terrorism is guerilla warfare. And no, terrorism is not a new concept. People just coin it terrorism recently.

One more note to add. I find the death of the five Jews totally absurd. They were, really, totally innocent and they aren't even involved with Kashmir! I understand if they target the Hindus, but the Jews?

Hello Israel, terrorists hate jews... where have you been? if they can kill two birds with one stone, why not?

Do you really disagree that religious extremism is the dominant form of organised terrorism in the world now? While the media has done a fine job sensationalising it and thus unfortunately desensitizing some from the effects of terrorism, statistics does prove global terrorism has risen dramatically post 9/11.

Take a look at how many well-organized terror groups there are, and how many of them are well-funded and with no lack of recruits. Terrorist cells and their recruiters can move about the entire Middle East with relative ease. Egypt alone is a haven for them, even though the government is an official US ally.

I don't see the need to quantify human life by comparing it to poverty or the crusades or how many people have died where and when, but the fact is terrorism is real right now and it does affect everyone, including the white man. Genocides, wars and slavery have all happened before, but are we still wrong to mourn at such senseless loss of life and property that is happening now?

How would you feel to live life everyday, praying the train you took or the cafe you lunch at wouldn't blow up? How would you feel if you have a family of four to protect and feed as well? Wouldn't you agree that it is all a tad backwards, considering the age we are living in? This isn't the Age of Faith anymore. Why is religion still a problem?

Is terrorism just another sad fact of life to disregard, like other social diseases such as poverty or AIDS? Should we just turn a blind eye and hope everything goes for the best, maybe donate few bucks here and there? or should we just disregard it because worse things have happened? Is human life all about the numbers?

 

[tim098]

Has anyone read either today's or yesterday's "Today" paper? I am quite sure it is today. Some writer was writing that terrorists are no more than vile animals, killing for the sake of bloodshed.

WHAT THE BLOODY HELL IS THAT. I was honestly considering writing in to tell them of how shallow and childish that entire article was but im too lazy to do that. For the sake of bloodshed; does the writer think this is some movie where the terrorists are all evil born evil bred evil minded bastards bent on killing people for the fun of it??

Im am 100% sure the terrorists have their own reasons for their actions. I am not saying their actions or even reasons are good or that I agree with them, thats NOT what i am saying at all. I am saying that although their reasons and actions may seem wrong, there still at least ARE reasons. I am saying that articles like that do NOTHING to improve anyone's knowledge of anything. If anything at all, it either poisons readers' minds further that all terrorists are mindless killing fcukers or it shows how bloody stupid and shallow the writer is. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

[soft]

tim098

I have a suggestion. If they want to make their 'cause' known by 'bloodshed', maybe they can do a group suicide? Definitely make headlines, "200 terrorists committed suicide peacefully without hurting anyone".

This would be the most effective.

 

[fuzztremecho]

"200 terrorists committed suicide peacefully without hurting anyone".

that Boss, is the best scenario...hehehehe

 

[jskadiang]

I think the terrorists have caught on that killing others don't exactly serve to promote their cause to the rest of the world, doing the opposite in fact. I'm pretty sure the gunmen in Mumbai were enjoying themselves too, from the fact that they were laughing as they slaughtered innocent people.

Cause or no cause, their actions are completely unacceptable, and I don't know why you're standing up for them. So they have their own reasons for doing what they did, still doesn't make them any better than vile animals as the journalist wrote. People kill all the time, for money, due to jealousy, still doesn't make them any better than scum even though they had their own reasons. Scum, that's all they are.

 

[rottenramone]

you don't shoot mp5s like this!! its not counterstrike!!!!

 

[rottenramone]

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/11/mumbai_under_attack.html

 

[tim098]

tim098

I have a suggestion. If they want to make their 'cause' known by 'bloodshed', maybe they can do a group suicide? Definitely make headlines, "200 terrorists committed suicide peacefully without hurting anyone".

This would be the most effective.

I wish this would happen man. This way the only lives lost are those that have already accepted their loss of life. Not the innocent people

 

[tim098]

I'm pretty sure the gunmen in Mumbai were enjoying themselves too, from the fact that they were laughing as they slaughtered innocent people.

Where did u get this from? If it is from the Mumbai media, I question their credibility. I've lived there for a short period of time and the media there is sensational, to say the VERY least.

Cause or no cause, their actions are completely unacceptable, and I don't know why you're standing up for them. So they have their own reasons for doing what they did, still doesn't make them any better than vile animals as the journalist wrote. People kill all the time, for money, due to jealousy, still doesn't make them any better than scum even though they had their own reasons. Scum, that's all they are.

Heh bro nono I am not standing up for them. Thats the last thing I'd do, had they delayed their attack by one day, my father who is working there might have been a hostage at the Oberoi hotel.

What I am criticising is the article written, it takes into account NONE of the terrorists' POV. Had they mentioned anything about the brainwashing these terrorists go through, or any other relevant factor, I wouldn't have gotten worked up at all. Instead, the writer portrays them as movie-esque 'typical bad guy who only lives to kill' antagonists.

 

[mrforum]

you don't shoot mp5s like this!! its not counterstrike!!!!

seriously, where did you get your picture? Its so hilarious, looks a like an American Cowboy.

 

[hecklerkoch]

tim098

I have a suggestion. If they want to make their 'cause' known by 'bloodshed', maybe they can do a group suicide? Definitely make headlines, "200 terrorists committed suicide peacefully without hurting anyone".

This would be the most effective.

If 200 terrorists would kill themselves without hurting anyone, they would not be called terrorists lah.

What terror would they invoke from others if they do not harm anyone but themselves eh?

They would just end up looking like stupid idiots.