DM's Beatles forums

Other forums => Current Affairs => Topic started by: Sondra on November 28, 2008, 06:05:12 AM

Title: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Sondra on November 28, 2008, 06:05:12 AM
We were watching this on CNN for most of the day. Just thought this needed a thread. Any thoughts??

Here's the latest:
[size=18]
Clues point to domestic terrorists in India attack[/size]

      
By PAISLEY DODDS Paisley Dodds
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: An Apple Beatle on November 28, 2008, 08:44:15 AM
I have been watching the events on BBC quite a bit over the last few days. Seems there were about 10 co-ordinated attacks. Mumbai being India's Beacon of multi-cultural harmony and the future of India being a world power. It's a place for both business and tourism and the attacks are thought to have been very well planned.

Surreal seeing footage of crowds watching people in their hotel room windows, unable to get out. I think the Taj Mahal hotel is nigh on cleared now by indian commandos. I did see a miltitary general refer to the attacks to be potentially from Pakistan. Obviously a lot of dis-array at the moment.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on November 28, 2008, 01:09:24 PM
Quote
They are very angry and firmly believe that India is killing Muslims and attacking Islam.

The familiar chant of Muslim fundamentalists everywhere: you can hear it in Asia, northern Africa, southern Europe and anywhere else a Muslim population has to co-exist with the infidel.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: alexis on November 28, 2008, 05:20:45 PM
And all this will continue until these young men in their twenties believe that they have other better options than martyrdom. Right now the "foot soldiers" are joining these packs because they have nothing else to do - often illiterate and ignorant of almost everything but religious instruction, and with no skills except being violent. They are like the inhabitants of Jim Jones' collective, but worse - they want to take people with them.

It's the leaders that I really blame ... those who know what hell they are unleashing. It's in their best interest to keep these young men without education, and with no economic hope of a lifestyle that provides for a family - the natural tendency for humans since time immemorial.

It just ain't right. Just my 2cents.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: DaveRam on November 29, 2008, 09:07:23 AM
There is some speculation in the UK press , that some of the terrorists could be British .
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on November 29, 2008, 09:54:14 PM
He's onto something here: what the Muslim terrorists object to is modernity, self-determination, sex, money, and anything else that runs against the pathetic small-mindedness and ignorant bigotry of fundamentalist religion.


What They Hate About Mumbai
By SUKETU MEHTA
Published: November 28, 2008 / New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/29/opinion/29mehta.html)

MY bleeding city. My poor great bleeding heart of a city. Why do they go after Mumbai? There
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: harihead on November 29, 2008, 11:14:04 PM
I seem to remember the same advice being given in America after our 9/11 attacks-- go out and spend! I didn't find that an appropriate or respectful attitude regarding the tragedy then, and I don't find Mehta's "work hard and party harder" invocation at all compelling either.

Yes, we cannot give in to the hateful close-mindedness of terrorists, but for crying out loud, there are other responses than to spend money. We can all adopt the attitude of working for a better world so extremists have something to live for, rather than dying for the fairy tales of their faith. Get involved in your community locally, teach kids to read (or teach anyone any other skills), give a loan to someone starting a small business, and on and on. When you make the world better for everyone, not just those jetting off to Mumbai to spend their accumulated dough, we will see an end to terrorism.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on November 30, 2008, 12:47:26 AM
Quote from: 551
I seem to remember the same advice being given in America after our 9/11 attacks-- go out and spend! I didn't find that an appropriate or respectful attitude regarding the tragedy then, and I don't find Mehta's "work hard and party harder" invocation at all compelling either.

He's being slightly ironic: he's thumbing his nose at the religious puritans and telling people to go right on doing what their doing, and in fact to do more of precisely what p*sses the godly off because all of it's more life affirming and fully human than anything a vicious fool with a god dredged out of the worst part of the dark ages stuck in his head can imagine. Anyway, he makes your point, too:

But the best answer to the terrorists is to dream bigger, make even more money, and visit Mumbai more than ever. Dream of making a good home for all Mumbaikars, not just the denizens of $500-a-night hotel rooms. Dream not just of Bollywood stars like Aishwarya Rai or Shah Rukh Khan, but of clean running water, humane mass transit, better toilets, a responsive government. Make a killing not in God
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: harihead on November 30, 2008, 05:11:27 AM
I suppose. He focuses far too much on money for me-- "Make a killing not in God
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: DaveRam on November 30, 2008, 09:24:59 AM
Quote from: 551
I seem to remember the same advice being given in America after our 9/11 attacks-- go out and spend! I didn't find that an appropriate or respectful attitude regarding the tragedy then, and I don't find Mehta's "work hard and party harder" invocation at all compelling either.

Yes, we cannot give in to the hateful close-mindedness of terrorists, but for crying out loud, there are other responses than to spend money. We can all adopt the attitude of working for a better world so extremists have something to live for, rather than dying for the fairy tales of their faith. Get involved in your community locally, teach kids to read (or teach anyone any other skills), give a loan to someone starting a small business, and on and on. When you make the world better for everyone, not just those jetting off to Mumbai to spend their accumulated dough, we will see an end to terrorism.

harihead the 7/7 London suicide bombers were involved in the community one was a teaching assistant and another helped run a Fish and Chip shop business .
These guy's were respected in my community , i know this as i live very close to where they lived and worked.
The people of Leeds were shocked that two of there own could do such a thing .
We live completly seperate to Muslim's now any sense of community spirt as gone , it's difficult to do what you say when trust as gone .
In my city thats now the case , we don't get along anymore , suppose in that respect terrorism as won ?
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on November 30, 2008, 12:59:54 PM
Quote from: 551
Sorry. Mammon is a dirty word in my book these days.

Mine, too: facetiousness about money, whatever the original intent, is in poor taste these days. The only thing mammon has going for it is that at least it is not Muhammad.

Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: harihead on November 30, 2008, 05:39:13 PM
Thanks for understanding, Geoff. I'm genuinely distressed over what I see as a return to feudal lordship in what are supposed to be democratic-based societies. And these pinheads really think they're better than me-- who died and made you lord?

DaveRam, that's such a sad situation. Although my friend wasn't serious, it really does sound for a case of putting all the instigators or supporters on an island. You certainly experienced a betrayal of trust by people who should have known better. They were in your community and knew you as people. What makes a person so whacked they want to go out and commit mass murder? So yes, I can see that taking a long time to rebuild, and they will have to earn it. As long as you have whackjobs trying to impose their world view on others, we'll have this unrest. Why can't everyone just agree to get along? (slaps around the whackjob leaders who are the only ones who gain from it)
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on November 30, 2008, 09:11:30 PM
Quote from: 551
And these pinheads really think they're better than me-- who died and made you lord?


Einstein, in an entirely different context, said something about God being subtle and not malicious. Religious fundamentalists, Muslim and otherwise, believe precisely the reverse: that God is about as subtle as a TV evangelist's pitch for money, and as malicious as a suicide bombing. Maybe fundamentalism is really a form of anti-religion?
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: harihead on November 30, 2008, 10:28:37 PM
I don't pretend to understand the religious mind. God supposedly is love, yet he smites believer and infidel alike and consigns most people to everlasting torture. In all honesty, I see no difference at all between the Judeo-Christian god and Zeus, god of thunderbolts. It's all some wacky deity myth that just sounds ridiculous.

Einstein, as I suspect you know, did not believe in a personal god either. His use of "god" refers to the spirit of Nature. Religious people have hijacked his words, even after he tried to set them straight. A couple of quotes from here: http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einprayr.htm

Quote
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

...

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science.

    My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance-but for us, not for God.


He expresses himself so well. Yes, morality is of the utmost importance. I cannot conceive of a god worthy of the name who commands his followers to butcher unarmed innocent people. I can conceive of a world where the rest of us get together and say, "This is always unacceptable" and do what we can to make sure it doesn't happen again, and that the vicious perpetrators of this deplorable act are punished.  
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Sondra on November 30, 2008, 10:50:02 PM
Reading Einstein's quotes, I get the impression that he did believe in a higher power. He doesn't come off atheist, just anti-organized religion. He uses the phrase, "personal god", which I think shows that he's saying he doesn't support the belief of this sort of judging entity that sits on his throne controlling his creations. Anyway, that's what I get out of this quote:

"My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance-but for us, not for God."

He knows that our awareness is so small that it's impossible to say with one hundred percent conviction that a higher power doesn't exist. I think people of his great intellect AND enlightenment often feel this way. They remain open. At least that's what I'm getting out of it. Of course, I'm probably completely wrong!

I think John Lennon expressed a similar belief. From what I've read. Just an openness to possibility I guess. Naive or not. Who knows.

"I believe in God, but not as one thing, not as an old man in the sky. I believe that what people call God is something in all of us. I believe that what Jesus and Mohammed and Buddha and all the rest said was right. It's just that the translations have gone wrong."

and

"I believe in everything until it's disproved. So I believe in fairies, the myths, dragons. It all exists, even if it's in your mind. Who's to say that dreams and nightmares aren't as real as the here and now?"

Anyway, it's people who pervert religion anyway. As they do so many things. They kill in God's name and use it as an excuse for their hatred. Doesn't mean God or the concept of God is bad. A lot of people get something very good out of it. And I'm betting there's a hell of a lot more who get something positive out of it than negative. That's just not discussed. People will be people. If there were no concept of God, there would be something else to use as an excuse. It's all down to the individual and what they choose to do with it. I certainly wouldn't begrudge anyone their beliefs if that's what gets them through the day or compels them to do the right thing. Some people need to feel that they're being watched over and cared for. Some don't. Who's to say which is right and which is wrong? To confuse the issue because some radicals take the concept and use it to commit acts of violence based on their own narrow minded grasp of reality is just a waste of time. There's a deeper problem here. Which I think Alexis hit on a bit earlier.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Hello Goodbye on December 01, 2008, 01:38:00 AM
Quote from: 551
I seem to remember the same advice being given in America after our 9/11 attacks-- go out and spend! I didn't find that an appropriate or respectful attitude regarding the tragedy then, and I don't find Mehta's "work hard and party harder" invocation at all compelling either.
As this is an international forum and some of us are young and impressionable, I find it necessary to comment on harihead's statement.  Having personally witnessed the tragedy at the World Trade Center, my recollections are more precise.  There were certainly no calls to "go out and spend" made after the attack either by the government or the press.  Indeed, New York City was in a lockdown mode for over two days.  It was quite eerie making my way into NYC on the following day.  Only doctors, hospital staff and emergency workers could enter into Manhattan.  After the military checked my credentials, I was permitted to cross the George Washington Bridge to get to Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center where I am a surgeon on staff.  Most of lower Manhattan was without electricity.  Businesses and schools were shut and everyone was at home, still in shock over the events of the preceeding day and fearing further attack.  The only advice being given was to those qualified to assist in rescue, recovery and treatment of the injured.

Perhaps the passage of time and current economic and political affairs have colored the memories of individuals who were situated a distance from the areas of attack, but I assure all readers that no insensitive remarks such as Mr. Mehta's were made after the 9/11 attacks.

Barry
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: harihead on December 01, 2008, 03:13:44 AM
I'm sorry, Barry, I should have been more clear. The call to spend, as I recall, was after the recession associated with the tragedy kicked in. It was not an immediate call. I in no way intended to cause more pain to those of you who experienced this tragedy. I only meant to convey how disgusted I was to hear that "call to arms", particularly as our military, which you could reasonably expect to be anywhere in the world in 24 hours, took a month to get to Afghanistan. Bin Laden would have to be an idiot to sit there the entire time waiting for us. I am still furious over this misdirection and inadequacy of the US response.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Hello Goodbye on December 01, 2008, 03:33:05 AM
It's just not realistic to think that our military; Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force, can be anywhere in the world, fully deployed with appropriate weaponry and backup personnel, in 24 hours.  The month it took was a feat in itself.  The patriotic hearts of the armed forces can be thanked for that.  

Yes, Bin Laden is no fool and no doubt was on the move constantly at the time.  And obviously still is today.  But it is of little matter, really.  His capture would not mean the end of Al-Qaida.  The objective in Afghanistan was and is more complicated than that.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on December 01, 2008, 03:37:10 AM
Quote from: 551
The call to spend, as I recall, was after the recession associated with the tragedy kicked in. It was not an immediate call.

Yeah; nobody was being glib about 9/11- the idea was to encourage consumption in order to prop up demand and keep the economy moving. It sounds facetious, but at least with respect to economic activity, it isn't, and there was fear of a big economic contraction that winter. Reducing the basic idea to "go shop" was trivializing it, though, because it left out things like go invest, go build, and go get an education.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Hello Goodbye on December 01, 2008, 03:52:23 AM
Geoff, we were already in a mild recession at the time of the attacks and had been for about a year.  The recession deepened a bit after 9/11 but it was not as deep as had been predicted in the late 1990s.  

I'm still at a loss as to who was making all these "calls to spend."
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on December 01, 2008, 04:11:16 AM
Quote from: 59
The recession deepened a bit after 9/11 but it was not as deep as had been predicted in the late 1990s.  


Quite true, I think, but the government was afraid that people were about to dramatically cut back on spending after the Muslim terrorist attacks. Bush didn't quite say "go shopping," either; he said, "We cannot let the terrorists achieve the objective of frightening our nation to the point where we don't conduct business, where people don't shop." As usual, the full substance of what he said was eroded to a one-second sound bite for partisan advantage. (See here (http://www.nypost.com/seven/03192007/news/regionalnews/hill_in_9_11_shop_chop_at_w__regionalnews_stephanie_gaskell__post_correspondent.htm).)

Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on December 01, 2008, 04:19:47 AM
Quote
I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

...

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation.

I feel like standing up and applauding both these statements.  :)
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Sondra on December 01, 2008, 04:51:15 AM
Read them in context here starting at about page 386. It's interesting stuff. Wonder what he would make of the world today. Not that it's all that different from his time really.

http://books.google.com/books?id=dJMpQagbz_gC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Einstein++his+life+and+universe#PPA386,M1

Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Hello Goodbye on December 01, 2008, 06:16:48 AM
Quote from: 1161

Quite true, I think, but the government was afraid that people were about to dramatically cut back on spending after the Muslim terrorist attacks. Bush didn't quite say "go shopping," either; he said, "We cannot let the terrorists achieve the objective of frightening our nation to the point where we don't conduct business, where people don't shop." As usual, the full substance of what he said was eroded to a one-second sound bite for partisan advantage. (See here ([url]http://www.nypost.com/seven/03192007/news/regionalnews/hill_in_9_11_shop_chop_at_w__regionalnews_stephanie_gaskell__post_correspondent.htm[/url]).)


Thank you for linking to that article, Geoff.  I agree with your summation; politics tends to blur past events and distort the meaning of what was said on record.  It's too bad that Senator Clinton chose the events and aftermath of the 9/11 attacks to, in part, base her criticism of the opposing political party for the benefit of her own campaign.  Many of us in the New York area objected to that tactic.  We all needed to feel secure after the attacks.  I feel the government did much to insure our safety.  I certainly don't want to stir up a debate over Homeland Security on this Beatles forum, but I'll simply say that I'm happy there have been no other attacks here since that fateful day.

Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: DaveRam on December 01, 2008, 09:30:43 AM
The problem with fighting this so called War On Terror , is we have been doing it wrong from the begining .
The terrorists are using quite low-tech gorilla tactics against us .
What we need to focus on is good intellegence , each time one of these attacks happen intellegence seems to have failed .
We need Spies everywhere from your career spy to the little old lady walking her dog .
I also think we need to fight this like "The Cold War " in that we never really knew what was happening in that war , i don't care if people are taken out in the dead of night by our security services , play the buggers at their own game go deep undercover and root them out and kill them , before they kill us .
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: alexis on December 01, 2008, 03:22:15 PM
Quote from: 971
The problem with fighting this so called War On Terror , is we have been doing it wrong from the begining .
The terrorists are using quite low-tech gorilla tactics against us .
What we need to focus on is good intellegence , each time one of these attacks happen intellegence seems to have failed .
We need Spies everywhere from your career spy to the little old lady walking her dog .
I also think we need to fight this like "The Cold War " in that we never really knew what was happening in that war , i don't care if people are taken out in the dead of night by our security services , play the buggers at their own game go deep undercover and root them out and kill them , before they kill us .

I hear what you are saying, DaveRam, but we have to be very careful when we wish for things like this. Yes, in the perfect world, only the bad guys would be taken out in the dead of night. And if YOU were in charge of everything, then no one would come take you or your family by mistake.

But what about me? Mistakes get made, the wrong people get taken away and "disappeared" ... or worse, that process is used as a tool to settle political scores and the like. And before we know it, we are like Argentina, where a whole generation was disappeared, and the country is scarred for another generation more.

If for no reason other than no process is perfect, and because it is not acceptable for innocent people to be made to disappear, it's so important that habeus corpus be part of the legal code of any civilized society.

The argument has been made that if we start doing away with underpinnings of civilization to fight terrorism, then we have already lost that war. I think there is a lot to be said for that.

Just my 2c!
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: DaveRam on December 01, 2008, 04:23:46 PM
I understand what your saying alexis about the rule of law , and of course such a strategy of bumping people off would need safe guards .
We killed an innocent man in the wake of the London bombings , due in part to a breakdown of intelligence from our security services , so i know you need to be very careful when you act .
But i believe you have to put the fear into these people , they need to feel like they are been watched and followed i want them to be utterly paranoid .
And good intelligence is what is needed , we should have people everywhere spying on them .
these people use appartments and house's in our community , we should be paying neighbours to spy on people .
My mum would do it , she does'nt miss a trick in their street .










(wink1)
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Kevin on December 03, 2008, 11:03:46 AM
Quote from: 1161

The familiar chant of Muslim fundamentalists everywhere: you can hear it in Asia, northern Africa, southern Europe and anywhere else a Muslim population has to co-exist with the infidel.

Woh. Don't you find it a bit easy to blame this on religious fundamentalists, as if this was the work of deranged lunatics?
The Mumbai terrorists were fighting to end what they see as India's illegal occupation of Kashmir. UK and US are attacked for our foreign policy (invading, occupying and looting middle eastern counties while providing unflinching, uncriticical support for Israel, regardless of how many dozens of UN resolutions it ignores.)
Surely these issues are political, not religious. In the seventies these people would have gatherred under the banner of communism. Black September and the PLO weren't Muslim fundamentalists.
I of course don't agree with their methods, but would point out that the US and the UK had no problems with slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians in WW2 in order to achieve a political/military objective. I don't remember anyone branding the IRA as Christian Fundamentalists.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: alexis on December 03, 2008, 03:33:29 PM
Quote from: 185

Woh. Don't you find it a bit easy to blame this on religious fundamentalists, as if this was the work of deranged lunatics?
The Mumbai terrorists were fighting to end what they see as India's illegal occupation of Kashmir. UK and US are attacked for our foreign policy (invading, occupying and looting middle eastern counties while providing unflinching, uncriticical support for Israel, regardless of how many dozens of UN resolutions it ignores.)
Surely these issues are political, not religious. In the seventies these people would have gatherred under the banner of communism. Black September and the PLO weren't Muslim fundamentalists.
I of course don't agree with their methods, but would point out that the US and the UK had no problems with slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians in WW2 in order to achieve a political/military objective. I don't remember anyone branding the IRA as Christian Fundamentalists.

This goes back to what I said a bit earlier here, the violence and horror will persist as long as certain NON-religious problems remain. I agree with what I think you are saying Kevin, the religious aspect of all this is just the latest convenient war banner for the decade's violence. for In my mind, these political and territorial "red lines" would disappear with education and economic opportunity. I would wager that if all these terrrorists had an option to make a decent living, support their family, and have a reasonable hope that their kids would have even a better life than they do, they would not only stop bombing, they would gladly work WITH the very people they're trying to kill now.

Just my 2c. Bucking for a position in the Obama administration. But do these ideas make me a flaming liberal, or an Adam Smith capitalist hard core conservative?
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on December 04, 2008, 11:12:37 AM
Quote from: 185

Woh. Don't you find it a bit easy to blame this on religious fundamentalists, as if this was the work of deranged lunatics?

Muslim fundamentalism is a reaction to the whole secular, empirical, rational mode of post-Enlightenment thinking and manner of conceiving the world. A similar phenomenon has occurred among some of our own Christians and interestingly at about the same time. There are  all sorts of political and economic components depending on who you're talking about, but I think the tap root is here.

Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Kevin on December 04, 2008, 11:45:38 AM
Quote from: 1161

Muslim fundamentalism is a reaction to the whole secular, empirical, rational mode of post-Enlightenment thinking and manner of conceiving the world.

Yeah...well...I was going to say that next. Obviously.   :)
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: DaveRam on December 04, 2008, 02:20:57 PM
Quote from: 1161

Muslim fundamentalism is a reaction to the whole secular, empirical, rational mode of post-Enlightenment thinking and manner of conceiving the world. A similar phenomenon has occurred among some of our own Christians and interestingly at about the same time. There are  all sorts of political and economic components depending on who you're talking about, but I think the tap root is here.


Geoff do you mean it's a reaction to secularism ?
I read this post and my two brain cells gave up lol , not sure i understand what you have said , but it sounds great
(tongue6)
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on December 04, 2008, 04:08:24 PM
^  ;D

Sorry guys, that was a huge mouthful (and I was trying to stuff a bagel into mine at the time), but I couldn't think of another way of saying it which wouldn't have required about 10,000 words of explanation that I had no intention of typing and which would have been too boring to read anyway.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: alexis on December 04, 2008, 08:22:48 PM
Quote from: 1161

Muslim fundamentalism is a reaction to the whole secular, empirical, rational mode of post-Enlightenment thinking and manner of conceiving the world. A similar phenomenon has occurred among some of our own Christians and interestingly at about the same time. There are  all sorts of political and economic components depending on who you're talking about, but I think the tap root is here.


Though undoubtedly true to a degree, I still can't help but feel the religious aspect is just the most convenient way for these frustrated young people to express a deeper rage actually based on the knowledge and feeling that civilization is moving on - and they and their way of life are being left behind to rot. It's no coincidence that these people are being recruited from among the poorest and economically least developed parts of the world. Imagine being a young male in a West Bank camp - turning on the TV or the internet and seeing what incredible opportunity is available to apparently everyone but you and people like you, realizing that your future is likely to be even worse than your father's who cannot get a meaningful job and cannot support his family. The life of a terrorist martyr really doesn't sound so bad compared to the alternatives, one might imagine.

 I'd guess that enrollment in Madrassas and terrorist schools would drop by more than half if, in order to enroll, each of those young men had to leave behind 3 square meals a day, a chance to make a decent living, and a reasonable hope that their kids' lives would be better than their own. It just seems like it would be harder to maintain a high degree of outrage with a full belly and hope for the future.

So though I agree with your description of fundamentalism on the face of it being a reaction of running away from secular/empirical/rational/post-enlightenment thinking, I have a sneaking suspicion that these potential terrorists' embrace of this fundamentalism would loosen up quite a bit if they were actually given a chance to sit at the table with the rest of civilization. Given this, I think there is hope that this horror can end - not by trying to bomb them away, but by using the same money to educate them and help them develop and thrive.

Just my 2c!
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: DaveRam on December 05, 2008, 12:30:05 AM
The Leeds suicide bombers and the Glasgow airport bombers were not poor they were professional people?
I can see that other's are though , so it's wrong to say it's just about poor life chances .
Lots of people live in poverty and would never dream of killing other's in this way .
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Geoff on December 06, 2008, 01:13:16 PM
Quote from: 971
The Leeds suicide bombers and the Glasgow airport bombers were not poor they were professional people?

Many of the Islamist movement's leaders are or were middle class or better. Sayyid Qutb, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and most obviously Osama bin Laden were not poor men leading a class revolt. In fact, they resemble Puritans more than anything else.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: alexis on December 08, 2008, 04:26:40 PM
Yes, but I think if the poor foot soldiers had a chance to do other meaningful things in their lives besides signing up for martyr duty, these middle or upper class revolutionaries would not have as much of a movement to lead. As I said above, it's not like all terrorism would disappear, I think the problem would ultimately become more of a low level one, rather than a real threat to our way of life.

Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Kevin on December 09, 2008, 10:34:11 AM
I too think it's a bit of a myth that we're up against brainwashed, uneducated poor folk. That is definately not the experience here in Britain, but does assist us in convincing ourselves that we hold no blame in all of this.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: alexis on December 09, 2008, 02:36:13 PM
Quote from: 185
I too think it's a bit of a myth that we're up against brainwashed, uneducated poor folk. That is definately not the experience here in Britain, but does assist us in convincing ourselves that we hold no blame in all of this.

Well, you may be right in the first part of your post, I suppose we'll learn more as time goes by ...

What are you thinking about with your 2nd part ... where do you think the blame needs to be placed?
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: Kevin on December 29, 2008, 11:04:30 AM
Quote from: 568

Well, you may be right in the first part of your post, I suppose we'll learn more as time goes by ...

What are you thinking about with your 2nd part ... where do you think the blame needs to be placed?

I just think the world is never that simple that it can be divided into "right" and "wrong." Greater minds than my own debate this still.
Title: Re: Terrorists Attacks in India
Post by: BlueMeanie on December 29, 2008, 11:15:04 AM
Quote from: 185

I just think the world is never that simple that it can be divided into "right" and "wrong."

This is most of the problem as far as I can see. Most people tend divide the world into 'right and wrong', when in reality most things fall somewhere in between. It of course leads to a total lack of understanding, and until people start taking the blinkers off, that's the way it will stay.