Brazilian shot dead on the London subway
Jump to Page:
< Previous [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] [ 9 ]
Posted on: 31-07-05 11:30:34
Quote:
Orginally posted by BlueLobster
I don't think there are too many moderates in that part of the world who actually look at America favorably or give it much credibility anyways.
Thats right.
Quote:
Not on civilian targets.
Thats right too....
Does it make suicide bombings against military/police targets legit?
Would it be ok if one were to use other method of killing people, short of suicide bombing?
Or is every method of killing a civilian wrong, incl air attacks?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I once made a mistake, but I was wrong about it.
Since I dont want to start another thread...I am putting it here....may or maynot be related to what we are talking.
***********************************************
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1186717.cms
Why there are no Indian Muslims in al Qaeda
Why are there no Indian Muslims in al Qaeda? There are no easy answers. But there are two probable reasons. One is the assurance of a level-playing field for all citizens in India because of the success of the democratic system. The other is the absence of American influence on Indian policy all through the Cold War years and, to a large extent, even now.
To start with the second, it has been observed that a majority of the terrorists come from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt and some of the North African countries. What is common about these countries is the lack of a genuine democracy, despite the adherence to form, and longstanding virtual patron-client links with the US. What is more, these two factors are interconnected.
A basic reason why the military or feudal autocrats control these countries is that the US propped them up to serve its economic and diplomatic interests. It was either the presence of oil or their utility as frontline states against the Soviet Union that guided the Americans.
As is known, Osama bin Laden, a Saudi millionaire, was an American ally when his band of fundamentalists fought the Soviets in Afghanistan. It is the cynical use of these countries by Washington that built up a reservoir of resentment among large sections of their people against the US.
This anger may have become all the more intense because there were no democratic outlets - no parliament, opposition parties, a free press and a free judiciary - to let off steam.
The difference between India and these countries is obvious. India's 'noisy democracy', as an American newspaper recently put it, ensures that all segments of public opinion - anti-US, pro-US, neutral - are routinely aired.
Besides, during the Cold War, India was regarded by the US and the West as being in the anti-American camp despite its claims to be non-aligned. This perception gave India a certain dignified status in the eyes of its own people since the Western world was still seen as being engaged in a colonial enterprise.
The pro-American countries seemingly lacked this sense of self-esteem, as was evident from the title of one of America's favourite dictator Ayub Khan's book, "Friends, Not Masters".
...
..
.
Complete article in the above link.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I once made a mistake, but I was wrong about it.
Quote:
Orginally posted by mercury6
Does it make suicide bombings against military/police targets legit?
I don't know. Maybe in a time of war when two opposing militaries are hopelessly mismatched, this may be the only way for the weaker party. The conventional thing to do would be to accept defeat and surrender, but that may not be an option for some.
Quote:
Or is every method of killing a civilian wrong, incl air attacks?
Every method of targeting civilians is wrong.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Are you there?
Advertise Contact Us Privacy Policy and Terms of Usage FAQ Canadian Desi © 2001 Marg eSolutions Site designed, developed and maintained by Marg eSolutions Inc. |