Re: Lal Masjid Siege Thread - Operation Silence (merged)
One woulds be religious extremism = not religious extremism but Fitna creator.
Other you labeled as anti-religious extremism and barbariasm = here you are not only unjust but abusively accusive, as other was fighting fitna.
Other were neither extremist nor intolerant or barbaric, as it was their duty to keep law and order in the country, and being in authority, law and power was in their hand to use. If they were extremists, intolerant and barbaric then they would not have been extending their dead-lines, giving all opportiunity to these terrorists so that they come to their senses and surrender.
These others whom you are trying to label as barbarian even risked their lives to blow up boundry wall of Masjid and Madrasa so that if anyone is held there against their will than they could escape. Actually, if they were Barbarians then instead of fighting on ground, they would have carpet bombed the place to ground.
In the end, army lost 11 precious men killing around 80 terrorists and capturing 50 terrorists. I think 11 loss of army men was unnecessary, because these rascal deserved carpet bombing and bringing the place they were hiding to ground.
There is nothing wrong with Taliban or Talibanic people. Wrong is in what they are doing or want to do, that is, fight state and impose their will and Shaitanic beliefs over others. Ssme thing Rascals of Lal-Building and Madrasa was doing, and that means, both these people, Taliban and Lal-Buildinng people were/are same, that is Fitna.
As for your suggestion that government should have agreed with all their demands and later becked down after taking their surrender, than I have to tell you that person in command at the time was honest Muslim and was not Zardari Bhutto or Nawaz Shareef-ul-Haq … both of whom can promise anything and later back down. Maybe that is the difference between Muslim dictator and Munafiq third world democrats … and that is why world do not trust Third world democracy.