True matsui, but there are very powerfull forces in pakistan against this future.
The problem is Matsui, that not everybody agrees with the american point of view. Take europe as an example. Many accept that Hamas and Islamic jihad have a valid cause and claim. They dont not agree with their tactics. But they dont like them with Al Qaeda. Its only the narrow minded hick mentality of the americans that links valid independence movements with terrorism.
After all Mandela was consider a terrorist. So was Gandhi. How many would agree with that today?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CM: *
The problem is Matsui, that not everybody agrees with the american point of view. Take europe as an example. Many accept that Hamas and Islamic jihad have a valid cause and claim. They dont not agree with their tactics. But they dont like them with Al Qaeda. Its only the narrow minded hick mentality of the americans that links valid independence movements with terrorism.
After all Mandela was consider a terrorist. So was Gandhi. How many would agree with that today?
[/QUOTE]
Mandela and Gandhi did not strap bombs on their followers to murder and maim innocent women and children in their cause. It's only the narrow minded and confused mentality that link valid, peaceful independence movements with those who use terrorism. Whether or not Gandhi or Mandela were ever considered terrorists does not change the fact that most rational people will NEVER consider homicide bombing of civilians a legitimate tactic.
^ Seminole that is not true..If you were to give 20 F-16's and reschedule $2 B in loans for some people, they would see it our way. Funny isn't it? The precedence is there... Taiban, Kashmir, Waziristan...what was a great cause for religious/ethnicity sake can be shelved in mere moments for the right amount of Hershey's chocolate kisses. For an economy like the US, we can buy these loyalties out a million times over because we know the spine isn't there based on moral conviction and it has been proven time and time again.
Seminole, i suggest you read up on South African history. Mandela's party was response for bombings and the like. It is all a well documented fact. They targetted white men, women and children. They libyans trained some of them.
Gandhi may not have attacked. But various parties through out indian history did use armed violence against the british raj.
Matsui when you have an inkling of international politics please post here instead of trolling. If you continue to do that we would have to start ignoring you like Chilli and Asif.
CM, I suggest you look at how both Mandela and Gandhi preached non violent resistance as a means of struggle for liberation. THAT is a well documented fact. Violence, war, and other armed resistance has always been used as a means throughout history to gain independence, but the low life that are strapping on bombs and blowing up innocent people are not worthy of anyone's respect. I pray this evil trend ends soon as these hate-mongers may soon be doing the homicide bomber shuffle in Karachi.
CM, please give examples like I have given in how you counter my "feeble" international politics assessment in the post above.
I assume you agree. So your point is that ethnic religious affiliations have no bearing on national interest. Thereby nation state being greater than any religion..so it is ok that for the sake of the nation, such pithy causes like religious bonds, congruity of border based on praying habits etc can be sacrificed.
Great!! I think we agree..no need to write ****** yaar..you are with us, not against us. :)
Mandela preached non-violence. But his party didnt really follow up on that. There were elements in his party, which he lead that attacked civilians. By the standards applied today any man part of a terrorist organization is a terrorist. Irrespective of the what he or she preaches.
Though this is a subject for a seperate discussion. I do not follow the Kantian view that the ends justify the means. The method is important as is the cause of employing said method. Every "terrorist" group employs the methods because the political avenues have been exhuasted or the other party is hell bent on destorying their way of life. Remember the Israelis started the aggression first in this intifada. The intifada was the response. Kashmir is just another case where the Indians have been maiming, raping and killing people on whim. Same with chechnya.
Matsui once again you dont have all the facts. Religious and ethnic affiliations have a great bearing on national interest. After all that is the reason that Saudi and UAE provide us with oil at below market price and in the past have provided it for free. Sadly due to the war in iraq that may end. But those decisions were solely affected by our standing within the Islamic world and based on religion.
Anyway back to Pakistan. We have always dealt with terrorists. Remember that the President started his hunt for the "evil" elements within our society back in 1999. Not after Sept 11th. Before that. So his current policy is nothing new. Rather a follow up to his original claims.
Secondly it is not about being bought. When you have a hegemonic bully bouncing all around the world and attacking which ever country it wants you have to protect your own. You dont do it because you want to. You dont do it because you are bought. You do it because you fear that the current re-incarnation of Stalin doesnt attack your nation.
Thirdly everybody knows that the US is a fickle ally. It could pull out when it means to and do whatever it so wishes, whenever it wants. So being bought doesnt mean anything as the gains are extremely short term.
That is a brief assessment, not what your posts consists of which is nothing but trolling.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
CM, I suggest you look at how both Mandela and Gandhi preached non violent resistance as a means of struggle for liberation.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, Seminole but did the ANC not use armed force as a means of resistance?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Malik73: *
Yes, Seminole but did the ANC not use armed force as a means of resistance?
[/QUOTE]
Haha!! :) So true!
As I stated in the same post -- violence, war, and other armed resistance have always been used as a means throughout history to gain independence, but the low life that are strapping on bombs and blowing up innocent people are not worthy of anyone's respect. I suspect when Al-Qaida starts this practice with a little more regularity in Pakistan you will see my point.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Seminole: *
As I stated in the same post -- violence, war, and other armed resistance have always been used as a means throughout history to gain independence, **but the low life that are strapping on bombs and blowing up innocent people are not worthy of anyone's respect.*
[/QUOTE]
You mean like the Tamil Tigers?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Malik73: *
You mean like the Tamil Tigers?
[/QUOTE]
Yes, like LTTE. But since this thread is not about Sri Lanka I didn't feel the need to mention them. I think Pakistan has more to worry from AQ homicide bombers.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Malik73: *
You mean like the Tamil Tigers?
[/QUOTE]
how many tamils arrrested in london?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by rvikz: *
how many tamils arrrested in london?
[/QUOTE]
Not many, but quite a few were arrested in Canada, weren't they ;)
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Khilaari: *
Not many, but quite a few were arrested in Canada, weren't they ;)
[/QUOTE]
mallik cant justify lot of thing by comparing with ira , ltte and other
local groups.
rvikz, here in switzerland, the largest minority is of sri lankans. And they actively fund the Tamil Tigers. Heck the swiss have a special office to help bring sri lankans over. These sri lankans, fund, support etc the Tamil Tigers.